Open Left - project vote

Restoration of Voting Rights Gains Support across the Nation

project vote — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross-posted to Project Vote’s Voting Matters Blog

The message that democracy works best when all citizens participate – including those reintegrating into society after serving time for felony convictions - is finally being heard by the public, the media, and the U.S. Congress. Whether the message will affect the change needed to enfranchise the millions of Americans who currently cannot represent their communities in the democratic process, it is encouraging to find more citizens recognize the value in voting rights restoration and its impact on rehabilitation.

In light of the July 24 introduction of the Democracy Restoration Act of 2009, which would restore federal voting rights of felons who have been released from incarceration, numerous media outlets and voting rights advocates appear inspired to speak out on the importance of felon voting rights in general.

Calling it "an overdue change" for the 33 states that strip felons of their voting rights post-incarceration, the Detroit Free Press hails the federal bills, HR 3335 and S 1516 as a solution to inequity in both the criminal justice system and voting rights, particularly regarding minorities and the communities to which they return. Of the five million disenfranchised Americans, "nearly two million of them, including more than one in eight black men, are disenfranchised by these vestiges of Jim Crow."

"Democracy requires that voting rights extend to as many people as possible," the Free Press editorialized. "Voting rights rebuild ties to the community. They give people a stake in society and connect them to its norms and values."

The notion that "restoring voting rights of the formerly incarcerated is essential to helping them reintegrate into society and become productive citizens," is widely gaining support, Kathryn Boockvar, a Pennsylvania-based attorney for the Advancement Project, wrote in the Patriot-News. Boockvar, who was writing in support of a state measure requiring prisons to provide released felons with voter registration materials (HB 1072), noted a recent report by the Brennan Center for Justice, which cites a 2006 survey that found 60 percent of Americans agree with this idea.

Such a proposal has become law in at least two states in recent years. In May, the state of Washington lifted a ban that prohibited thousands of felons from voting with the passage of House Bill 1517. Until a couple weeks ago, the state required all felons to fully complete their sentences and repay all legal financial obligations before they were eligible to vote, according to the ACLU Blog of Rights. Blogger Rachel Bloom told the story of a man she called "John," who had "completed his sentence yet remained disfranchised because he had outstanding legal financial obligations, of which almost two-thirds was interest."

"When asked why he wanted to vote, John said he had two reasons: ‘I’m raising my grandkids. It’s been a cycle of jails and institutions for them and I want to show them a different picture...I want to show them what being included in society looks like and yet I can’t provide that while being disfranchised. The other reason is that I personally want a say. Right now, I’m being taxed without representation.’"

A 2006 change in the Rhode Island Constitution allowing probationers and parolees to vote brought about 6,000 more registered voters in the 2008 elections, according to the Providence Journal. The law had previously disenfranchised an estimated 15,000 people who were serving probationary terms that could "run a decade or more in some cases."

"Despite changing laws, there were still many hurdles to getting people back on the rolls," wrote Desiree Evans of Facing South, an online magazine for the Institute of Southern Studies. "For instance, some former felons were unaware and uninformed of the reinstatement of their right to vote in some states. And in other states complicated re-enfranchisement procedures on top of widespread confusion and misinformation about the proper administration of the varying state laws made the process of restoring the vote even more difficult."

Although the fight for restoration of voting rights remains an uphill battle, "voting rights advocates should keep fighting in the courts, state legislatures and Congress," the New York Times editorialized on August 4, noting a federal court’s decision to uphold the Massachusetts ban on voting by convicted felons. A group of prisoners challenged the law, claiming it violated the Voting Rights Act because disenfranchised felons in Mass. are "disproportionately black and Hispanic... partly because of a bias in the justice system."

"Letting the case go forward would not have meant the prisoners would have won," the Times said. "But it would have recognized that the law could violate the Voting Rights Act, depending on the facts that emerged about it in court."

Whether felon voting rights will be changed through state and federal legislation, or through review of the cornerstone Voting Rights Act, one notion remains the same. "The United States aspires to be a nation in which the government rules by the consent of the governed people," the Times wrote. "Prisoners do not cease to be people."

Officials Violate Voting Rights & State Laws by Implementing Stricter Photo ID Requirements

project vote — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross-Posted to Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

State and federal law outlines, protects, and facilitates the voting rights of citizens. Under ideal circumstances, these laws make voting equally accessible to all eligible Americans without unnecessary barriers or hurdles. Unfortunately, the right to vote is too often misconstrued by the very officials charged with helping to protect and facilitate that right, leaving voters at best confused, and at worst disenfranchised.
Illustrating the problems that can arise from the improper imposition of election laws (intentional or not), Arkansas has gained some attention for wrongfully requesting photo ID from some voters in the November 2008 election.

On Election Day 2008 Project Vote received calls from concerned voters in Jefferson and Pulaski counties who claimed election officials were demanding photographic proof of identity at the polls; according to Arkansas law the state is only supposed to request ID of voters whose given birth date at the polls does not match that on the precinct voter registration list. Even under those circumstances, a voter is not required to present government-issued photo ID, but is allowed a wider range of options outlined in the Help America Vote Act, including a copy of a utility bill or a paycheck.

In a notice letter sent to Secretary of State Charlie Daniels last week, Project Vote election counsel Donald Wine wrote that "through the inconsistent imposition of a photo identification requirement by these local election officials, Arkansas is effectively denying voters equal access to the voting polls under law." Wine further urged Secretary Daniels to "issue a directive informing all state and local election officials of the correct procedures and directing those officials to abide by the current statute that references the way a citizen can be identified as a registered voter."

Following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to uphold Indiana's strict photo ID law in Crawford v. Marion County Board of Elections, several other states appeared to circumvent their own state laws by demanding additional ID, according to records from the Election Protection coalition's 866-OUR-VOTE hotline. In fact, voter ID in general kicked up a cloud of confusion last year with hundreds of voters calling the hotline with problems that went beyond the improper request for ID from misinformed poll workers, including inquiries from perplexed voters who were unsure of the exact type of ID that their state requires.

While the inconsistent variety of election laws across the states clearly have an impact on election officials and voters alike-especially if the law relates to controversial issues that affect select communities, such as voter ID and felon voting laws-the emphasis for clearing confusion should first be put on those charged with implementing the rules. Transparency of election law between the state and the citizen starts with the person that voters meet when exercising their right to vote: the poll worker. To ensure every voter that walks into the polls is treated fairly and advised by the same election rules, every state must ensure that poll worker training is uniform across the state to ensure that there are no illegally disenfranchised voters, unwanted media attention, or legal challenges.

Online Voter Registration Reaches Some Citizens, but Won't Close the Electoral Gap

project vote — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog.

Access to voter registration continues to be an issue in the U.S. where only 71 percent of the voting eligible population is registered to vote. With young, low income, and minority citizens lagging behind in voter registration and participation, this fraction of registered voters only represents a skewed picture of the American people.
In an effort to make voter registration more accessible, several states have joined Arizona and Washington this year by passing laws to provide certain citizens the convenience of registering to vote with the click of a mouse. Colorado, Indiana, Louisiana, Oregon, and Utah are among the states that recently enacted such laws while Kansas has just made voter registration accessible online to eligible citizens in the state, according to the Associated Press. However, a new memo by Project Vote consultants Jody Herman and Doug Hess finds that, while online voter registration is a "welcome new convenience," its impact will most likely be limited in reducing the tremendous demographic disparities that currently exist in the electorate.

Using Nielsan and Census data, the report examines the limitations - and benefits - of online voter registration by describing the U.S. households that do not have internet access and comparing the findings to voter registration rates in those households based on race/ethnicity, age, educational attainment, and income.

"In most cases, the demographic groups that are already less likely to be registered are also the least likely to have internet access in the home," Herman wrote. Among these groups are low income citizens, those without high school degrees, and Latinos, rendering online voter registration less effective for the very people who need access to the electoral process most. According to the memo:

• Low income households are not only less likely to have internet access (41%), they are also least likely to be registered to vote, compared to other income brackets (65%).
• Educational attainment appears to have an affect on access to both voter registration and internet. Just 36% percent of those without high school diploma have internet access - 41 percentage points lower than the national average. Similarly, this group registers to vote at a rate that is 21 percentage points lower than the national average (50%).
• Black and Latino households are less likely to have access to the internet, with only 63% of households in each group. However, Latinos are disproportionately underrepresented in the electorate, registering at 12 percentage points lower than the national average.

"An additional problem is that online voter registration systems that require an online registrant to have an existing signature in a state database-such as in a driver's license database and/or state voter registration database-will further limit the accessibility of an online voter registration system to disadvantaged groups," according to the report. (A 2007 study on voter ID accessibility in Indiana exemplifies this issue, as voters with only high school education, as well as low-income and minority citizens, were found to be less likely to posses identification required, in this case, to vote.)

While online registration seems to disproportionately reach mostly those who are already overrepresented in the electorate, it may open doors for one group that is notoriously plagued with voter access and participation issues: Youth. Citizens ages 18 to 34 register to vote at a rate of 10 percentage points behind the electorate as a whole. However, young people are most likely to have internet access, with 88 percent of younger households connected to the Web. This may prove beneficial in incorporating America's future decision makers in the electorate.

Irrational Prosecutions the Latest Trend in the War on Voter Registration Drives

project vote — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

This week Project Vote and the ACLU of Pennsylvania filed a lawsuit, on behalf of ACORN, against Pennsylvania Attorney General Tom Corbett and Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen Zappala, Jr. The purpose of the suit is to keep the district attorney from filing a frivolous complaint alleging that ACORN's method of retaining - not paying - canvassers was a violation of state law.
There have been a lot of fireworks surrounding Project Vote and ACORN's highly successful voter registration efforts that helped enfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters in 2008. First were the criminal complaints filed against ACORN and two workers in Nevada, and now the impending threats to prosecute ACORN in Pennsylvania raise more hysteria. However, one look beyond the media cries reveals that these cases have nothing to do with so called "voter registration fraud." These cases are based not on charges of submitting fraudulent registrations, but rather on the bogus charge that ACORN violated statutes forbidding compensation to canvassers based on the number of applications they collected.

According to the Pennsylvania statute in question, "a person may not give, solicit or accept payment or financial incentive to obtain a voter registration if the payment or incentive is based upon the number of registrations or applications obtained." The Nevada case involves a similar statute. As investigations against ACORN found no direct violations of existing law, officials in these states have attempted to overreach by narrowly interpreting state statutes to charge that ACORN violated the law for implementing performance standards to determine whether to retain an employee. In reality, ACORN does not, and did not, pay its canvassers based on the number of applications they collected, but does expect individuals it hires to actually collect voter registration applications. By Pennsylvania and Nevada's interpretation of their statutes, however, setting any performance standards-no matter how flexible or reasonable-is a violation of the law, an interpretation that would make it nearly impossible for anyone to conduct a paid voter registration drive in these states.

For such a tortuous stretching of the common sense meaning of a statute, one might look back to tactics last employed in South Carolina in the 1950's to prosecute black demonstrators at lunch counter sit-ins. South Carolina's trespassing statute criminalized "entry" upon any establishment after notice from an owner or tenant prohibiting such entry. This law was used to prosecute two African-American men who had taken seats in a restaurant booth without having received any notice that they were not permitted to do so; after they sat down, employees put up a "No Trespassing" sign and asked the two men to leave. The two men were arrested and convicted by the state, which stretched the word "entry" to include "already sitting in a booth." The convictions were upheld by the state Supreme Court.

In 1964 the case, Bouie v. City of Columbia, reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which found that, not only was the conflation of "trespass" with "entry" legally faulty, but South Carolina had never asserted this argument before. Therefore, the Supreme Court found "the crime for which these petitioners stand convicted was 'not enumerated in the statute' at the time of their conduct. It follows that they have been deprived of liberty and property without due process of law in contravention of the Fourteenth Amendment."

Similar retroactive law-bending tactics are being seen today in Pennsylvania and Nevada. State officials are stretching the statute that prohibits paying canvassers per card (a practice neither ACORN nor Project Vote employs) to claim it applies to any performance standards. In other words, requiring an employee to collect even one voter registration application in order to keep receiving a regular paycheck would be, in the states' view, a violation of state law. Not only does this definition-which has never before been applied in this way-stretch common sense, it would effectively put an end to paid voter registration drives, which appears to be the underlying goals of these tactics.

With five ex-canvassers having already been charged with accepting money under the policy, ACORN-represented by the ACLU and Project Vote-has filed a complaint against the district attorney to enjoin him from criminally charging ACORN for its employee retention policy. They argue that retroactively stretching the statute in the manner proposed by Pennsylvania violates ACORN's right to know that its actions violate the law, and also violate ACORN's free speech rights.

Paid voter registration drives are the most effective way to help give underrepresented communities a voice. Officials who succeeded in applying such twisted interpretations of state laws would make it impossible to run a paid registration campaign, to the disservice of the democratic process and of the communities they serve.

New Project Vote Report Evaluates Fifteen Years of the NVRA

project vote — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:19:36 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's Voting Matter's Blog

By Michael McDunnah

Signed into law by President Clinton in May of 1993, the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) was hailed by some as "the final achievement of the 1960's voting rights revolution," and proponents estimated that it would add 50 million Americans to the voting rolls. However, in a comprehensive new report released today by Project Vote, The NVRA at Fifteen: A Report to Congress, voting rights attorney Estelle Rogers finds that lack of enforcement, failures of state and federal leadership, and restrictive court decisions have left the full potential of the NVRA unrealized, and have left millions of disenfranchised Americans still awaiting the promise of a truly inclusive democracy.
The stated goals of the NVRA were to increase the number of eligible citizens who register to vote, to make it possible for state governments to affirmatively enhance participation, and to protect the integrity of the election process and voter rolls. "This sounds as American as apple pie," says Frances Fox Piven, noted voting rights scholar and activist, in her foreword to The NVRA at Fifteen. "But as Estelle Rogers explains in the report-the first of its kind to comprehensively evaluate the implementation of the NVRA-the reform of American registration procedures has met widespread resistance, some of it attributable no doubt to bureaucratic inertia, and some of it perhaps politically motivated."

During the first two years of its implementation, the NVRA contributed to one of the largest expansions of the voter rolls in American history. But many states have resisted or rejected the mandates of the NVRA since its passage, often challenging them in court, while others have been allowed to ignore their responsibilities due to lax enforcement by the Department of Justice. As a result, fifteen years after the passage of the NVRA, voter registration was once again cited frequently as THE PROBLEM marring the 2008 election. Tremendous disparities in the electorate still remain, controversies rage across the country over voter registration and list maintenance issues, and some seven million Americans-according to the 2008 Cooperative Congressional Election Survey-either attempted unsuccessfully to vote or were discouraged from voting by administrative barriers. It is clear that many problems the NVRA sought to address remain uncured, and its full promise remains unfulfilled.

"It is important to assess what has been accomplished and suggest what might be done to achieve the level of civic participation envisioned by the statute's drafters in 1993," Rogers says. The NVRA at Fifteen is the first in-depth evaluation of how four major provisions of the NVRA have-and more importantly haven't-been successfully implemented: the "motor voter" program, establishing voter registration through motor vehicle offices (Section 5 of the NVRA); the creation of a simple, universally accepted mail-in registration form (Section 6); voter registration through public assistance agencies serving low-income families and people with disabilities (Section 7); and the regulation of how states can and cannot remove voters from the rolls (Section 8).

The "motor voter" program is the best known of the NVRA's mandates, and it has also been the most successful, according to Rogers, though "poor training requirements and lack of oversight and accountability of motor vehicle offices have led to problems with noncompliance."

The least successful, "without question," has been public agency registration-not because it doesn't work, but because states are ignoring their responsibilities to provide it. "After initial success in its first two years of implementation," Rogers writes, "Section 7 has been largely neglected (and in some cases almost wholly ignored) by many state agencies. A lack of authority on the part of chief election officials over state public agencies, and a failure on the part of the Department of Justice to enforce the requirement, have contributed to the pervasive failure of Section 7, to the disadvantage of millions of eligible low-income and minority Americans." (Project Vote and a coalition of voting rights groups have been working to bring several states into compliance with the public agency requirements of the NVRA, which the groups estimate could bring two to three million additional low-income voters into the electorate every year.)

The NVRA's attempts to protect eligible voters from improper purges have also been largely ineffective, according to the report. The NVRA lays out very clear criteria for removing voters from the rolls, but "these standards have been often misunderstood, reinterpreted, or ignored by states, resulting in list maintenance and voter purging programs that have violated the NVRA and disenfranchised eligible voters."

In the report, Rogers recommends several ways to improve the implementation of the NVRA nationwide, including practices that states can adopt to improve their compliance and suggestions for legislative changes Congress could enact to give the law more clarity and teeth. But the report identifies "several other more fruitful routes to improving the NVRA."

The Department of Justice, which is charged with enforcement of the NVRA, has recently been "asleep at the switch," according to Rogers. The DOJ has the responsibility to sue states that are out of compliance, and provide standards and guidance for states to comply, but for many years the Department has "simply has not taken advantage of its substantial authority, and the voters have suffered as a result."

"Finally," Rogers says, "the President of the United States, himself a former voter registration organizer and NVRA litigator, has extensive executive authority to breathe new life into the NVRA by exercising leadership over the Department of Justice and over other cabinet-level departments whose programs are or should be voter registration agencies."

As Rogers states in her conclusion, "if the NVRA were-finally-vigorously enforced and properly interpreted, it could well be the transformative law that its authors envisioned."

To download the full report, click here.

To learn more about Public Agency Voter Registration, click here.

Voting Rights Groups Sue States for Failing to Register Low-Income Residents

project vote — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

By Erin Ferns

Enfranchising America's least represented citizens is as simple as following the law: that's the message Project Vote and a coalition of voting rights groups sent today as they filed lawsuits against Indiana and New Mexico for failing to comply with the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).
Under a key provision of the NVRA, most states are required to provide voter registration opportunities to the millions of low-income Americans who apply for or use public assistance programs such as Food Stamps, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or Medicaid. Project Vote estimates that full implementation of this law could improve lagging voter registration rates among low-income citizens by two to three million new voters per year nationwide.

Unfortunately, compliance with the NVRA since its inception in 1993 has been spotty at best, non-existent at worst, leaving third-party groups with the hefty responsibility of picking up the slack by conducting expensive registration drives in disenfranchised communities. The groups believe it is time for government to be doing its job of registering its citizens, and to start by properly implementing and enforcing the NVRA.

The latest offenders under this federal law include the states of New Mexico and Indiana, both of which are being sued for denying hundreds of thousands of residents the opportunity to register to vote. Representing the plaintiffs are Project Vote, Demos, the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the NAACP, the ACLU of Indiana, and law firms, Barnhill & Galland and Schwartz, Lichten, & Bright, Freedman Boyd Hollander Goldberg & Ives, and DLA Piper U.S.

Last week, the Election Assistance Commission confirmed that poor implementation of public agency registration is a "widespread problem," according to today's press releases. Between 1995 and 1996 - the first two years the law was in effect - 2.6 million voter registration applications were collected from people who visited offices for Food Stamps, TANF, and Medicaid. That number dramatically declined in 2007-2008, when fewer than one million applications were collected nationwide, according to the EAC report.

The decline was even more severe in New Mexico, where public assistance agencies-despite steady participation rates-showed a 90 percent decrease in voter registration applications from since 1995.

"In 2007 the average number of adult participants in the Food Stamp program alone was over 103,000, but [the Human Services Department] averaged only 134 registration applications per month," according to the press release. "Project Vote investigations of six HSD offices in January 2009 revealed that none of the offices provided voter registration application forms to their clients as part of the benefits application." Additionally, the complaint alleges that New Mexico has also been neglecting the better known "motor voter" provisions of the NVRA, which require motor vehicle offices to offer voter registration services. Officials from the HSD are among the defendants named in the suit, which also includes New Mexico's Secretary of State, Mary Herrera, officials from the New Mexico Motor Vehicle Division, and the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department.

"The NVRA was enacted to ensure that states affirmatively provide all citizens an equal opportunity to register to vote," says Nicole Kovite, director of the Public Agency Voter Registration Project at Project Vote. "By ignoring this vital law, New Mexico is denying this right to thousands of its residents every year."

In Indiana - which has one of the country's worst records for voter registration, particularly among low-income people-evidence of violations of the NVRA were also cited in the coalition's lawsuit against officials from Indiana's Family and Social Services Administration, the co-directors of the Indiana Election Division, and the members of the Indiana Election Commission. Although the state currently has more 300,000 adult participants every month in the Indiana Food Stamp program alone, voter registration applications have declined from 80,000 applications collected in the 1995-1996 election cycle to a dismal 2,519 in 2007-2008.

"Voter registration should primarily be the responsibility of the government," said Jeff Ordower, ACORN's Midwest regional director. "Indiana's noncompliance has not only resulted in thousands of low-income and minority Indiana citizens being denied the opportunity to register to vote, it has also forced ACORN, the NAACP, and other groups to expend considerable effort and resources to take up the slack."

As they did in Indiana and New Mexico, the coalition has sent pre-litigation letters "notifying California, Colorado, and New Jersey that lawsuits may be necessary if they do not bring their programs into compliance," the group said. However, the group emphasizes that states do not need to wait to be sued before finally complying with federal law.

"Recently several states that had been disregarding the NVRA have been forced to comply," according to the coalition. "Last week the State of Missouri settled a similar lawsuit brought by the voting rights groups; since a court order in that suit forced Missouri public assistance agencies into compliance in July, voter registration applications skyrocketed from fewer than 8,000 a year to more than 100,000 in just eight months. In 2008, Department of Justice investigations forced both Arizona and Illinois to take steps to improve compliance."

Settlement in Missouri Lawsuit a Victory for Low-Income Voters

project vote — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

In a major victory for voting rights, low-income voters in the state of Missouri will finally have better access to voter registration opportunities, thanks to a lawsuit settlement announced today by Project Vote, Demos, and the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

For years Missouri was one of many states neglecting their obligations under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) to offer voter registration services through agencies providing public assistance and services to persons with disabilities. After a court order in the suit required the state to comply with the NVRA in July, Missouri public assistance agencies went from collecting fewer than 8,000 applications a year to collecting over 100,000 applications in just eight months. Thursday's settlement of the case confirms Missouri's renewed commitment to continuing this remarkable success, and sends a message to other states that enfranchising its low-income citizens is as simple as following federal law.

This victory came about through the work of the Public Agency Voter Registration Project, a joint nationwide effort to assess and address areas of noncompliance. "With growing agreement on the need to improve voter registration in the United States, it is important to note that those least likely to be registered are low- to moderate-income Americans," said Nicole Kovite, director of the Project for Project Vote, in a statement released Thursday. (Forty percent of adult Americans who earn less than $25,000 are unregistered, compared to only 20 percent of citizens earning more than $100,000.) "This case illustrates how state governments can and should take the lead in reducing this disparity by fully implementing the public agency requirements of the NVRA."

In 2007 Project Vote assessed Missouri's track record of noncompliance and documented widespread violations of the NVRA. In April 2008, after unsuccessfully attempting to work with the state to resolve the issues, a lawsuit was filed against the Missouri Department of Social Services (DSS) on behalf of ACORN and St. Louis resident Dionne O'Neal. The plaintiffs were represented by lawyers from Project Vote, Demos, the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, and the law firm of Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP, as well as by local counsel Arthur Benson of Arthur Benson & Associates.

Evidence of the state's neglect of the federal law were cited in the July court ruling, including the state's own documents confirming that more than one million Food Stamps applicants could not have been offered voter registration between 2003 and 2008 because the DSS did not order enough forms required for its clients. Further, a field study conducted by Project Vote and ACORN found that half of all 21 counties surveyed did not routinely provide voter registration forms, and some flat out did not provide voter registration at all. In one particularly outstanding case, a county DSS allowed applications to pile up for an entire year without being turned in to be processed by the local election authority.

In the settlement agreement Missouri agrees to require "each DSS office to collect and report detailed monthly data on the numbers of persons visiting DSS offices, their responses to voter registration inquiries, the numbers of voter registrations completed and submitted to local election authorities, and other key information, and to provide this data monthly to plaintiffs' counsel," according to the press release today. The agreement also requires the designation of NVRA coordinators at both the state and local levels as well as the implementation of mandatory trainings of employees in voter registration duties. The DSS is also responsible for providing voter registration applications with regular mailings to clients and in connection with transactions by phone or internet.

The success in Missouri serves as a "timely reminder that governments, not third-party drives, are the most effective way to bring millions of low-income Americans into the electorate," as Jeff Ordower, Missouri ACORN Head Organizer, said in today's statement. The potential for this program nationwide is tremendous. Project Vote conservatively estimates that public assistance agencies nationwide could be collecting over 200,000 applications a month, or between two and three million per year.

Clearly, other states across the country that have ignored their responsibilities under the NVRA should take note of Missouri's example and bring their practices into compliance with this vital and effective law.

DOJ Rejects Discriminatory Voter List Procedure in Ga.; Raises Concerns for New Election Law

project vote — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

By Erin Ferns

A currently challenged provision of the Voting Rights Act requires several states with a history of discriminatory election practices to seek federal approval before changing election rules. Under this provision, the Department of Justice this week rejected a Georgia voter list maintenance procedure that it deemed both discriminatory and inaccurate, according to the Associated Press.
The decision will require Georgia to halt its controversial "citizenship check" procedure, whereby Social Security and driver's license numbers were used to check if voter applicants were citizens. Explaining the decision in a letter sent Monday to Georgia Attorney General Thurbert Baker, Loretta King, the acting assistant attorney general of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, said Georgia's procedure was "seriously flawed," and "frequently subjects a disproportionate number of African-American, Asian, and/or Hispanic voters to additional, and, more importantly, erroneous burdens on the right to register to vote."

Immigrant and voting rights groups lauded the Justice Department's objection to what U.S. Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) called "an attempt to take us back to another dark period in our history when people were denied access to the ballot box simply because of their race or nationality," according to the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

The Justice Department's decision "recognizes that the state of Georgia has attempted to disenfranchise not only Latino citizens, but Asian-American and African-American citizens as well," said Elise Shore, regional counsel for the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

Despite the high error rate and potential disenfranchisement of thousands of eligible voters, Secretary of State Karen Handel (a vocal supporter of the newly enacted proof of citizenship law and a candidate for governor for 2010) cried partisan politics upon hearing the Justice Department's decision to halt the state's efforts to weed out alleged noncitizens, which she called "good public policy."

"Handel's office said she is still considering options, including suing the Justice Department in federal court," according to the Atlanta Journal Constitution. "In a post to her Twitter account Monday morning, Handel was direct: 'If they think that we're not going to fight for this, they're wrong.'"

Unfortunately, Georgia wasn't the only state that viewed excessive citizenship screening procedures to asses voting rights - despite discriminatory implications - as "good public policy." Proof of citizenship requirements at registration is a growing threat among the states, affecting potentially 13 million Americans that do not readily posses documentary proof of citizenship, according to a 2006 study by the Brennan Center for Justice, which notes that low-income citizens are "more than twice as likely to lack ready documentation of their citizenship as those earning more than $25,000." Currently, Arizona and Georgia are the only states to have enacted proof of citizenship requirements in a supposed effort to prevent so-called "voter fraud" by non-citizens, but this year at least 10 other states introduced multiple bills to require proof of citizenship from voter registrants.

Voting rights experts argue that the supposed crime these laws are designed to combat don't exist. "We are not aware of any documented cases in which individual noncitizens have either intentionally registered to vote or voted while knowing that they were ineligible," wrote the Brennan Center's Justin Levitt, counsel for the Democracy Program, in The Truth About Voter Fraud. "Given that the penalty (not only criminal prosecution, but deportation) is so severe, and the payoff (one incremental vote) is so minimal for any individual voter, it makes sense that extremely few noncitizens would attempt to vote, knowing that doing so is illegal."

In his report, Levitt continues to say that allegations of noncitizen voting are commonly (and faultily) derived not from actual instances of voter fraud, but from questionable list maintenance procedures, similar to Georgia's citizen checking procedure. "The interpretation may be flawed, as when two list entries under the same name indicate different individuals," he wrote. "Or the lists themselves may be flawed, with an individual marked due to a clerical error as voting when she did not in fact cast a ballot."

Even as the U.S. Supreme Court considers a challenge to the VRA's Section 5 pre-clearance requirements, Georgia is currently awaiting the DOJ's approval of another citizenship check. The state recently passed a law to require new voter applicants to prove citizenship before being registered to vote, a measure that has been called the most "devastating" of election reforms for its disenfranchising impact on American citizens as well as its perpetuation of anti-immigrant hysteria in public policy.

Although Georgia's law will not come into effect until January - depending on the Justice Department's response - the law's effect may prove ultimately harmful to future voters. Since it's inception in 2004, Arizona's proof of citizenship law has already rejected 38,000 voter applicants, 70 percent of which stated under oath that they were U.S. citizens, according to the New York Times last year.

To monitor proof of citizenship and other election bills, visit www.electionlegislation.org or subscribe to the weekly Election Legislation digest, featuring election bills in all 50 states, by emailing Erin Ferns at eferns [at] projectvote.org.

Engaging the Future of America: Preregistration Measures Gain Traction in Three States

project vote — Sat, 23 May 2009 04:00:00 GMT

By Erin Ferns

Between 2004 and 2008, voter turnout among young people increased by two percent-or over 2.3 million voters-a triumph for this historically underrepresented group. However, with voter registration rates only increasing by one percent in spite of heightened political interest, it is clear that more that needs to be done to engage young voters beyond holding voter registration drives on high school or college campuses. While measures to provide voter registration or voter education opportunities for voting eligible Americans are important, three states have taken a step beyond by moving legislation to not only address the issue of standardizing the voter registration system, but to engage the future of America before they reach the age of 18.
Today, Hawaii and Florida are the only states that have enacted preregistration laws that permit all citizens as young as 16 to register to vote, a measure that advocates argue is the best way to incorporate youth into the democratic process.

As we reported in April, several state legislators have taken note, asserting that it may easier to conduct and participate in voter registration activities on high school campuses and DMVs with a lowered registration age. Lowering the age at which young people can register can boost "the effectiveness of civics education by tying it directly to civic participation through the opportunity to preregister," according to a Fair Vote report. The report further notes that 'uniform' preregistration laws, like those in Hawaii and Florida, help alleviate general voter registration ills by acting as a 'cost-effective step toward greater standardization, which means a cleaner, more accurate data set. Pre-registration could also save money and minimize human error by allowing students to register year round at points of civic engagement and education..."

In the last few weeks, legislators passed preregistration bills through at least one chamber in California (AB 30), Michigan (HB 4261 and HB 4337), and North Carolina (HB 1260). The Michigan and North Carolina bills have been assigned to their respective Senate committees while the California bill was just sent to the Senate on Thursday after passing the Assembly. Passage of the California bill is thought to be most significant due to its growing and diverse population, particularly among its young residents.

"Research shows that early involvement in politics leads to lifelong involvement," said California Assembly member and preregistration bill author, Curren Price (D-Inglewood) in an April press release. "Facilitating participation by younger voters empowers and engages our youth and ultimately strengthens our entire political process." The release further notes that the passage of a preregistration law would be beneficial to the state as registration and participation rates among young Californians is woefully behind other states, ranking 36th in the nation for turnout among young voters.

Thanks to growing support from voters and advocates, legislators hoped a preregistration bill in Rhode Island would not meet another doomed ending this year. With similar bills passing the legislature in the past only to be vetoed by the governor, institutionalizing preregistration in the state looked like it finally had a solid chance when the House adopted HB 5005 in March. The bill is currently sitting in the Senate Judiciary committee, however, and no hearings appear to be scheduled at this time.

Multiple factors affect youth voter participation, many of which parallel other underrepresented groups in the electorate. High mobility rates among these groups contribute to the difficulty with meeting voter registration deadlines and dealing with other administrative problems, including list maintenance issues that lead to wrongful purges, identification laws that require voters to present photo ID with current address, and other barriers more exclusive to mobile populations.

"We need only look at the revolution that has occurred during these Presidential Primaries to understand how hungry our youth has been to play an active role in their government, and how much their participation can influence our political future," Price said. "I want to respond to the desire of our youth and encourage them to exercise their undeniable power to influence our world."

Revamping Voter Registration to Reduce Disparities in the Electorate

project vote — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Although the 2008 presidential election showcased a more diverse electorate with an increase in voter registration and turnout by historically underrepresented Americans - including youth and minorities - the movement toward a more balanced electorate that represents all citizens is still a work in progress. Advocates have long maintained-and recently Congress has heard testimony to the fact-that disparities in turnout rates are less an issue of voter apathy, and more related to a severe lack of democratic access for many groups. The growing awareness of this problem has inspired an increased interest among citizens, advocates, legislators, and officials to improve the administration of elections, particularly regarding voter registration.
Enforcing Current Voter Registration Law

As Project Vote reported last week, with the release of an analysis of the 2008 electorate based on U.S. Census data, while the 2008 electorate showed improvement significant disparities still remain in voter registration and turnout between low-income and wealthy Americans. In 2008 there was a there was a 20 point gap in the registration rates between Americans from households earning $25,000 or less per year and those earning over $100,000.

One culprit for this continuing imbalance in representation is the states' failure to comply with provisions of the National Voter Registration Act that require public assistance programs to provide voter registration opportunities to their clients and applicants. These provisions were added specifically to help register low-income Americans and close the gaps in participation, but have been largely ignored by many states.

On April 10, the New York Times cited a recent report by Project Vote and pubic policy group, Demos that found registration at public assistance agencies dropped 79 percent in the 10 year period for which data was collected between 1995 and 2006.

Unsurprised by the lack of enforcement of public agency registration, the Times called on Obama's Justice Department to "do better" than the Bush administration, which "showed little interest in enforcing the law" that is supposed "to make it easier for eligible voters to register and to increase registration rates of traditionally underrepresented groups, including poor people.

"The larger answer to low registration rates is to enact laws requiring universal voter registration, which would put the burden on states to find people - through government lists, including tax records - and register them," the Times editorialized. "But until that happens, the Justice Department should make sure that states follow the motor voter law's more modest mandates."

Automating Voter Registration Procedures

"Universal Voter Registration" has been of key interest following the 2008 election as advocates and the media report on the voter registration system's negative impact on eligible voters who faced wrongful voter purges, or missed voter registration deadlines, among other voting barriers. With the NVRA currently being the "the only mechanism through which the government gets involved at all in voter registration," there's room for innovative improvements, according to Tova Wang, vice president of research at advocacy group, Common Cause in an April 8 Christian Century report.

"A better term for it is automatic permanent registration," Wang said. "Under such a system, the government gets people on the rolls in the first place and then keeps them on...At every point of their interaction with the government, citizens who are unregistered would be put on the registration list unless they opted out." Wang also noted how this would help mobile voters (who also tend to be young and low-income citizens) since "your change of address with the postal service or the DMV, for example, could automatically update your registration status. Your voter registration would essentially become portable."

Legislators on the state and Congressional levels are also addressing voter registration access issues on a smaller scale. Some measures focus on enfranchising young people through preregistration on the state level or requiring college campuses to serve as voter registration agencies by amending the NVRA. (Despite surges in youth voting in 2008, particularly among minority youths, roughly half of eligible 18-29 year olds failed to cast a ballot on Election Day.) More expansive efforts to create voter registration access online have been discussed in both state and federal legislatures, a movement that we warned lawmakers to approach with caution in a March 25 blog entry.

"While any attempt to make voter registration more accessible is to be applauded, it is important to note that these bills only benefit those who have the resources to obtain a driver's license or state ID. The very people most in need of increased accessibility to voter registration-low-income Americans, minorities, new citizens, young, and elderly voters-are those least likely to be helped by this kind of electronic registration...If we do not wish to perpetuate the current imbalances in the electorate, any efforts to make it easier for citizens to register to vote must recognize the need to make it easier for all citizens, not just those already likely to be enfranchised."

Through the enforcement of current election law and the careful consideration of voter registration reform that reduces disparities among underrepresented groups, the possibility of an electorate that represents all American citizens may finally be realized.

To monitor election bills, visit www.electionlegislation.org or subscribe to the weekly Election Legislation digest, featuring election bills in all 50 states, by emailing Erin Ferns at eferns [at] projectvote.org.

Measures to Expand and Balance U.S. Electorate Gain Traction in State Legislatures

project vote — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:00:00 GMT

by Erin Ferns and Donald Wine II

For the past few years, there has been a push by voting rights advocates to expand and balance the electorate in the United States. Finally, measures to help enfranchise some of the nation's least represented Americans are moving forward in several states. This past week, five states advanced bills to restore the voting rights of citizens convicted of felonies, while four states moved bills designed to facilitate voter participation among young citizens. This trend in election reform is a step in the right direction, which more states should take notice of and consider in the near future.
Voting Rights Restoration

Today, 48 states disenfranchise convicted felons at some point during incarceration, probation, or parole, resulting in the loss of voting rights for about 5.3 million Americans, according to research and advocacy group the Sentencing Project. "This fundamental obstacle to participation in democratic life is exacerbated by racial disparities in the criminal justice system, resulting in an estimated 13% of Black men unable to vote," the group reports. The inconsistency of felony re-enfranchisement policies among the 50 states creates confusion, not only among former offenders who wish to regain the right to vote, but also the very officials charged with implementing the laws.

Lawmakers in Georgia, Hawaii, Minnesota, Tennessee, and Washington each moved bills last week to restore the voting rights of former felons.. Notably, a Washington bill restoring the voting rights of felons "after they're released from state custody, including the completion of any parole or probation" was recently approved by the House, according to an Associated Press report.

"Supporters of the bill - all Democrats - said the state's present system amounts to a poll tax because people who have turned their lives around but can't afford to pay court fines are kept from voting," as current law requires all court-ordered fines to be paid before restoring voting rights, the AP reports. "Rep. Sam Hunt, D-Olympia, said the measure also would help state elections officials by clearing up a gray area: Under current law, it is difficult to determine whether a felon who is no longer in state custody has legally restored his voting rights."

The Washington bill is a small step closer to voting rights advocates' goal of automatic post-incarceration restoration of rights, whereby citizens who are released from prison would be immediately eligible to vote while on probation and parole. "These citizens would be permitted to register in precisely the same way as other eligible citizens, without submission of special paperwork," according to a 2008 report by Erika Wood of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law.

"Restoring the right to vote to ex-offenders is an integral aspect of reintegration into society," according to a 2007 Project Vote report, which notes a disproportionate over-representation of low-income and minority citizens in the criminal justice system. "Consistent policies are necessary to prevent large-scale disenfranchisement not only of the ex-offenders themselves, but also of the communities to which they belong. Society as a whole benefits when a representative government truly represents all its citizens."

The actions taken by these states to facilitate the restoration of the voting rights of former felons upon release from prison is one that should be duplicated by the other states that do not currently offer automatic restoration of rights upon release from incarceration. A truly representative electorate is one that allows everyone to partake in the process. Allowing former felons to register to vote upon the end of their prison terms will finally empower a segment of the U.S. population that has been underrepresented for years.

Youth Voter Participation Update

Last week, Project Vote blogged on progressing election reforms that focus on mobilizing young citizens outside of the college campus - primarily high school students and young minorities who make up a large portion of the untapped youth voting group. With the introduction of numerous bills to lower the voter registration age, incorporate civic engagement in the high school curriculum, and provide voter registration opportunities this year, a few have been gaining serious momentum in the last week.

Most notably, Rhode Island may join the majority of states in allowing 16 and 17 year olds to preregister to vote with the passage of HB 5005 from the House. Among three states to introduce such bills this year, Rhode Island is the only one to pass its preregistration bill after a hearing last week. Also noteworthy, bills focusing on voter registration on high school campuses in New Jersey (AB 2752/S 254) and Kentucky (HB 155) - both adopted by the houses- have advanced in the senates.

Youth voter advocates argue that citizens who become politically engaged at a young age become lifelong voters, bringing more people into the voting process at an earlier age and maintaining that involvement throughout their adult years. These progressing bills would help young facilitate and institutionalize voter engagement by making it a part of the school curriculum and permitting younger citizens to take steps towards becoming part of the democratic process through preregistration. Allowing youths to preregister when they are 16 or 17-say, in conjunction with receiving their drivers' licenses-would also move us one more step towards universal voter registration, as youths would learn the process of registration and will know how to keep their registration current as they move on to college or move out of their childhood homes into adulthood.

With an estimated 52 percent of the youth electorate turning out to vote last year, there is still room to grow. As we reported last week, "The youth electorate continues to lag behind the general electorate, a problem that only perpetuates the representational bias in our democracy. The real issue of voter access should be a focal point for lawmakers and advocates who want to encourage all young citizens, beyond the college campus, to let their voices be heard."

Whether discussing automatic restoration of voting rights or lowering of the voting age, one theme remains the same: voting rights should be accessible and consistent for all citizens. With more than five million citizens losing voting rights due to felony convictions and 25 million voting eligible "college age" 18-24 year old citizens missing out on voter registration opportunities that are too focused on college campuses, a huge chunk of the eligible voting population is being left out of the electoral process. As these bills indicate, it is time for states to finally take action in creating a more balanced, participatory electorate.

To monitor youth voting legislation, visit www.electionlegislation.org or subscribe to the weekly Election Legislation digest, featuring election bills in all 50 states, by emailing Erin Ferns at eferns [at] projectvote.org.

Senate Committee Hearing Examines Flaws in Voter Registration System

project vote — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 00:38:03 GMT

Calling voter registration "the lifeblood of our republic," Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY), chairman of the Senate Rules and Administration Committee, opened the committee's hearing this morning on current problems in America's voter registration system. A focus of the discussion was a new study produced by the Cooperative Congressional Election Survey-conducted by researchers at thirty universities across the country-that finds that up to three million voters actively tried to vote in 2008 but were denied, and an additional four million were discouraged from voting due to administrative barriers.
In their opening statements both Chairman Schumer and ranking minority member Robert Benett (R-UT) described the need to balance what Benett called the "two compelling and sometimes competing interests": ensuring that everyone who is eligible to vote can, while at the same time preventing those who are not qualified to vote from voting. While referring to this "yin and yang" of election administration, however, the testimony of the witnesses and the discussion that followed made it clear that the first issue-the systemic problems with the voter registration system that risks disenfranchising millions of eligible voters-is the area most in need of attention.

"In the 21st century people shouldn't be denied their constitutional right to vote because of problems caused by an antiquated voter registration system that was set up in the 19th century by the Whig Party," said Chairman Schumer.

Dr. Stephen Ansolabehere of Harvard University-one of the lead researchers on the study-testified as to the stark realities of the numbers. According to Dr. Ansolabehere, an estimated 79 million eligible American voters did not participate in the 2008 election -44 million because they were not registered, and 35 million who were registered but did not vote. According to data from the study, two to three million of these voters were prevented from voting because of registration or authentication problems, and another two to four million registered voters were discouraged from voting because of administrative problems. "Registration continues to create significant barriers to getting into the electoral system and to voting on Election Day," Dr. Ansolabehere said in his written testimony.

As Jonah Goldman, Director of the National Campaign for Fair Elections of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law said, the antiquated voter registration system "prevents more eligible voters from casting a ballot than any other part of the process."

"The United States continues to make voting more difficult than any other industrialized democracy," agreed Dr. Nathaniel Persily of Columbia Law School, who identified two major factors in this problem. The first is that Americans have a high mobility rate; an estimated 90 million eligible voters move every five years, and therefore are required to re-register each time-a problem that disproportionately affects certain vulnerable populations including low-income Americans, minorities, young voters, and military voters. The second factor, according to Persily, is that the American government takes a very limited role in affirmatively registering voters.

In her testimony Kristen Clarke, co-director of the Political Participation Group of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, raised the issue of "widely disparate practices among local election officials," including confusing application form design, implementation of HAVA's database matching requirements, felon disenfranchisement laws, and state purge programs, all of which improperly remove eligible voters-disproportionately low-income and minority Americans-from the rolls. "While we turn our attention to exploring the corrective action that must be taken," Ms. Clarke testified, "we must remain mindful of the particular challenges faced by those who are among the most vulnerable and marginalized in our society-the poor, those incarcerated, and our nation's racial and ethnic minorities."

Access to voter registration has always been particularly challenging for low-income citizens and racial minorities. One proven but neglected current solution received unfortunately little discussion today: the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) requirements that states register voters through public assistance agencies. Despite South Dakota Secretary of State Chris Nelson's testimony today that public assistance registration is one of the reason's the voter registration system is "easy and accessible," too many states are neglecting the public agency provisions of the NVRA-as Project Vote has documented-and getting away with it due to a history of lack enforcement by the Department of Justice on this and other voting rights issues.

Another problem Project Vote identifies in its testimony is the failure of local election boards to send timely notices to applicants on the disposition of their registrations-which not only denies applicants an opportunity to correct any problems, but also encourages "useless re-registration" by individuals who are not sure their application was processed. This contributes to the duplication problems that plague local election boards, choke databases, and hamper voter registration efforts.

"What is most vexing is the intractability of some of these injustices, which should have been remedied long ago," Project Vote's testimony concludes. "It is perhaps not surprising, though, with literally thousands of election districts operating with some measure of autonomy that a problem solved in one town is bound to crop up in another. That is why federal regulation and oversight is so essential in ensuring that our system of registration and voting will soon be worthy of the public's confidence."

To read Project Vote's written testimony, click here.

Red State Officials Appear Intent on Reducing Voter Participation

project vote — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 21:12:46 GMT

Cross-Posted at Project Vote's Voting Matter's Blog

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

by Erin Ferns

Last week we wrote about how partisan-fueled voter fraud rumors are leading election reform debates, potentially changing the way many Americans vote in future elections. With at least one state swiftly moving a bill to require all voter applicants to present proof of citizenship before registering to vote, and another strongly supporting the passage of voter ID, the threat of voter disenfranchisement looms ahead.
Overzealous Citizenship Requirements at Registration

Current law requires voter applicants to take an oath of citizenship when registering to vote. In February, bills requiring voters to go beyond current law to present proof of citizenship gained media attention. The Georgia Legislature introduced a number of related bills, with the approval of Republican secretary of state and gubernatorial hopeful, Karen Handel. She endorsed the bills despite the fact that her office's investigation had yet to substantiate any claims of illegal voting by non-citizens as a result of fraudulent voter registration, according to a Feb. 4 Associated Press report.

"These citizenship bills are even more devastating than the ID bills; they hit a lot more people,'' Neil Bradley, associate director of the American Civil Liberties Union Voting Rights Project told the AP. Up until this year, the state had endured several battles over the constitutionality of its requirement for voters to present photographic proof of identity when voting in person.

Despite the lack of evidence pointing to a need for the requirement, which "violates the National Voter Registration Act" and "creates a poll tax by forcing people who are missing their birth certificates or naturalization papers to have to buy new ones," proof-of-citizenship bill S.B. 86 was expected to pass the Senate on Tuesday, but not without hearing from voters and advocates, according to a blog entry at the Atlanta Journal Constitution. The League of Women Voters of Georgia urged its members to call their senators and ask them not to pass the bill, which would leave "countless U.S. citizens...needlessly inconvenienced." "[A]s a result of the increased hassle," the LWVG wrote, those citizens may "simply choose not to register to vote."

Despite the uproar and a two-hour "heated debate," S.B. 86 passed in the Senate 34-20, the Associated Press reported yesterday. "It now moves to the House."

As we wrote in a blog entry on Feb. 12, in enacting a citizenship requirement "Georgia would join Arizona in legalizing voter disenfranchisement. Since adopting the measure in 2004, more than 38,000 voter registration applications in Arizona have been thrown out, according to a May 2008 report in the New York Times. "More than 70 percent of those registrations came from people who stated under oath that they were born in the United States, the data showed."

"At some point, at some time, we've got to say enough is enough. And ask, do we have any shame?" said state Sen. Vincent Fort (D-Atlanta)in yesterday's AP report. "This is nothing but a poll tax. you can amend and soften it out however you want to, but this is a poll tax."

A Partisan Battle to Pass Strict Photo Voter ID

Currently, the Help America Vote Act requires first-time applicants who register by mail to provide proof of identity at the polls that includes a broad range of documents. However, eight states go above and beyond federal law by requiring or requesting current, photographic proof of identity only, a measure that has been repeatedly battled on constitutional grounds as the number of legitimate voters without proper ID trumps the number of fraudulent votes that occur in elections. This issue, often divided on partisan lines, appears to be gaining ground - as well as a reputation for being rife with partisan politics - in Texas.

"Sen. Troy Fraser, R-Horseshoe Bay, has alerted senators he plans to bring up the bill before a special committee that includes all senators March 10," according to the San Angelo Standard Times. "That could make Voter ID legislation the first substantive, non-emergency bill to hit the Senate floor during the 2009 session."

"Democrats say the legislation is designed to bolster GOP strength at the voting booth because it will discourage minorities, the elderly and other voters who lean Democratic not to show up at the polls." According to the report, Democratic Sen. Leticia Van de Putte of San Antonio said Republican officials in the Red state are "desperate" to pass a voter ID law out of fear that "Democrats can pick up seats in the house next go around." Additionally, "Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, a Republican said to be eyeing higher office, supports the voter ID and may cast a rare vote. Dewhurst can vote when the special Senate panel - called the 'committee of the whole' - convenes."

The bill is expected to pass the Senate since Republicans weakened filibuster rules in an effort to "break the logjam on legislation" earlier this year. However, Senate Democrats are hopeful that "their counterparts in the House, where Republicans have a narrow 76-74 majority, can block it."

Quick Links:
www.ElectionLegislation.org
Voter ID Requirements. Project Vote.
Politics of Voter Fraud. Lorraine Minnite, Ph.D. March 5, 2007.

In Other News:

OPINION: Voting reforms have made elections worse - The Denver Post
The Colorado Election Reform Commission (CERC) was created in the last legislative session to study possible election reforms. It has now adjourned after three months. Several election bills are already being considered in the legislature, and more will follow as a result of the CERC's recommendations.

Having their say: PUSH HEIGHTENS FOR ELECTION DAY VOTER REGISTRATION - Worcester Telegram & Gazette
WORCESTER - In last year's presidential election, 1,046 city residents showed up at the polls to cast their ballots, only to be told that their names did not appear on the voting rolls.

Irrational Fear of Voter Fraud Inspires Irresponsible Election Reform

project vote — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:09:00 GMT

Cross-Posted at Project Vote's Voting Matter's Blog

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

by Erin Ferns

Nationwide, budget concerns seem to be rendering most of this year's threatening election reform proposals impassable. However, that does not prevent these measures from perpetuating the irrational distrust in elections (and voters) that come with restrictive voter ID and voter registration proposals. Instead of focusing on resolutions that would create more transparency in election administration without disenfranchising voters, lawmakers in Oklahoma, Minnesota, Mississippi and Texas made headlines for their battles to move voter ID laws last week, while two more states are discussing bills that would negatively impact young voters.
Claiming voter ID is "about integrity," Minnesota voter ID advocates push House Bill 57, despite criticisms that the issue of voter fraud is "statistically insignificant to the point of being nonexistent," according to the Minneapolis Daily Planet. In addition to the danger of disenfranchising low income and minority voters, opponents fear that the provisions described in the bill could be costly for the state, and could hurt provisional voters as past elections show only one-third of provisional ballots are actually counted.

"The problems we have seen in Minnesota's current election system are frequently a result of unnecessarily complicated systems that allow multiple opportunities for error. This bill adds another layer of responsibility and complication," said Keesha Gaskins, executive director of the League of Women Voters of Minnesota.

While studies have consistently showed that voter purging from faulty list maintenance procedures, varying provisional voting rules, and overzealous election challenger laws compromise election integrity and disenfranchise legitimate voters more than the rare crime of voter impersonation, little effort has been made to resolve these flaws in the administration of elections, and voter ID proposals continue to dominate election reform discussions across the country.

Perpetuating the myth of voter fraud, and perhaps taking advantage of hysterical media exposure on the controversial issue over the last year, Mississippi Senator Joey Fillingane (R-Sumrall) is trying to take the voter ID fight away from legislators and into the hands of voters. Democratic lawmakers, who have "relented to a degree in their opposition" to voter ID, question Fillingane's motives since voter ID legislation- amended to exclude elderly voters or expand the list of acceptable ID - is finally moving through the Legislature, according to the Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal. "Fillingane has one year from Feb. 11 to gather the signatures," though he has reportedly not organized a petition campaign.

At least one media outlet in Texas, and voting rights advocates in Oklahoma, have spoken out against pending voter ID bills in their states with a common theme that the measures are, at best, pointless.

The League of Women Voters of Norman, Okla. said the proposed laws were "discriminatory" and "not in the public interest" in a Norman Transcript opinion piece on Saturday. "Oklahoma has one of the fairest and most efficient election systems in the nation. There is no evidence that voter fraud is or is likely to become a problem here. Oklahoma voters would be better served by focusing on the real issue -- maintaining the integrity of our fine state elections process."

The Waco Tribune-Herald in Texas, while dismissing opponents' argument that voter ID is a "defacto poll tax," also criticized voter ID supporters' arguments that illegal voters are diluting legitimate votes. "That, coupled with the fact some in Texas' emerging Hispanic population see this as racist, leaves us to wonder: Doesn't the Texas Legislature have more important business to do, especially when few instances of such fraud have actually been found?"

Fear of voter fraud is also being used to promote a reform regulating voter registration procedures in Georgia and to discourage a measure to expand the list of acceptable voter ID in Indiana. Both reforms appear to have an impact on young citizens - a consistently underrepresented constituency in the U.S. electorate.

Meanwhile, in Georgia, which faces serious budget issues, lawmakers are trying to put the spotlight on a bill to limit voter registration drives, according to local publication, the Albany Herald. Calling it a "proactive approach," or a reform to stop a voter fraud problem before it starts, lawmakers in Georgia hope to pass H 225, or at the very least "make a splash" in the legislature.

The bill would restrict unregistered voters from handling voter registration cards or conduct voter registration drives in the state.

"One of the objections bill sponsors have encountered as they've debated the measure is wording that would allow only registered voters to take part in voter registration drives. That would eliminate participation by Georgians under the age of 18," the Herald reported. Fear of voter fraud is nothing new to the state, which currently practices a strict photo ID law and has moved at least two bills to require voters to submit proof of citizenship before registering to vote this session.

Indiana, another state that requires photo voter ID, has stalled a bill to expand the list of acceptable ID to include student identification out of fear that it would "weaken current law." The state made headlines during the 2008 primary and general elections when numerous students were turned away from the polls for not meeting the state's requirement of current, state-issued photographic ID.

"How much is too much to ensure the integrity of our electoral process?" asked Minnesota Republican state representative and voter ID supporter, Tom Emmer. If paying the price of legitimate votes and complicating election administration in order to prevent a virtually hypothetical crime is not considered "too much," another question should be asked. How integral is democracy when it comes to election integrity?

Quick Links:
Minnite, Lorraine. "The Politics of Voter Fraud." Project Vote. March 2007.

In Other News:

House OKs registration, voting on the same day - Associated Press
New Mexicans could register to vote at early voting sites and cast a ballot on the same day under legislation approved by the House.

Judge blasts law as vote-fraud prober is paid - Cincinnati Enquirer
Hamilton County taxpayers will pay almost $15,000 to a special prosecutor who investigated allegations of voter fraud, an effort that a judge said Wednesday was a futile exercise and waste of money because of Ohio law.

Former Felons May Regain Right to Vote in Country's Strictest States

project vote — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 02:46:14 GMT

Cross-Posted at Project Vote's Voting Matter's Blog

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

by Erin Ferns

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.
The two states are currently the only states in the nation that permanently disenfranchise all felony offenders. Virginia, however, has permitted certain former felons to apply for restoration, which then has to be approved by the governor, according to the Virginian Pilot last week. With less than 10,000 Virginians having regained voting rights under the last four governorships and at least 297,901 still disenfranchised, it appears more has to be done. But it appears this will not be accomplished without a fight.

Last week, the Virginia Senate passed one measure and defeated another that would restore voting rights, the Pilot reported. Constitutional amendment SJ 273, a measure that would give the General Assembly "constitutional power to restore voting rights to non-violent felons," is now in the House. However, an arguably more effective measure "that would automatically restore voting rights once a felon completes their sentence and subsequent parole or probation" died on a 19-19 vote. "Republican Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, who presides in the Senate, broke the tie and voted against it."

Nationally, more than five million people are not allowed to vote as a result of a past felony conviction. Policies on felony re-enfranchisement among the 50 states are so inconsistent as to create confusion among, not only those former offenders who wish to regain the right to vote, but also the very officials charged with implementing the laws. Fair and consistent felony re-enfranchisement laws can contribute to the rehabilitation process, and reduce the harmful impact on low-income and minority communities where a disproportionately high number of individuals are disenfranchised due to felony convictions. With that, voting rights advocates are pushing for automatic post-incarceration restoration of voting rights, as we reported in last month's blog entry.

Under a system of automatic post-incarceration restoration of rights, "citizens released from prison would be immediately eligible to vote while on probation and parole, as are those who are sentenced to probation without serving any time in prison," according to a 2008 report by Erika Wood of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. "These citizens would be permitted to register in precisely the same way as other eligible citizens, without submission of special paperwork."
"Restoring the right to vote to ex-offenders is an integral aspect of reintegration into society," according to a 2007 Project Vote report, which notes a disproportionate over-representation of low-income and minority citizens in the criminal justice system. "Consistent policies are necessary to prevent large-scale disenfranchisement not only of the ex-offenders themselves, but also of the communities to which they belong. Society as a whole benefits when a representative government truly represents all its citizens."

While the Virginia bill has support from both parties, it "must travel a difficult path to become law," the Pilot reports. "The first step is being approved by the Republican-controlled House of Delegates that has already killed similar proposals this year."

Another fight is expected in Kentucky, where as many as 186,000 former felons may be able to vote again if House Bill 70 "gets the support it needs from lawmakers," according to local broadcast news outlet, WHAS 11. The bill would amend state law that permanently disenfranchises all felony offenders to restore voting rights after completion of sentence. The bill is now in the Senate.

To monitor the progress of Virginia and Kentucky's felon voting rights bills, visit www.ElectionLegislation.org and sign up for the Election Legislation e-Digest by emailing a subscription request to eferns(at)projectvote.org.

Quick Links:

Statistics by State. Sentencing Project.

In Other News:

Ads against same-day voter registration hit TV - Santa Fe New Mexican
A Las Cruces political action committee is running ads on cable television warning viewers that bills allowing same-day voter registration would lead to vote fraud, including out-of-state people pouring in to cancel the vote of New Mexican citizens.
Voter ID bill referred to full Senate - Marshall News Messenger [Texas]
The controversial voter identification bill that triggered a Senate rules fight last month on Tuesday was referred directly to the full Senate for a vote.

Voter ID law fails to pass House committee - Minnesota Public Radio
St. Paul, Minn. - A Minnesota House panel has defeated a proposal to require voters to show photo ID before casting a ballot.

Most "Devastating" Election Reform Gains Support in Georgia

project vote — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:00:27 GMT

Cross-Posted at Project Vote's Voting Matter's Blog

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

by Erin Ferns

If you wanted to register to vote today, would you be able to provide a copy of a birth certificate, U.S. passport or naturalization papers? Would those documents reflect your current name?
If you are like the 13 million Americans who do not have ready access to citizenship documents, or the 32 million voting-age women who do not have such documents with their current, legal name, then you would simply not be able to vote. That is a risk that several states are willing to make - a risk that is considered "even more devastating" than other restrictive election reforms this legislative session.

Last week, the Georgia Senate introduced yet another proof-of-citizenship bill with full support from Republican secretary of state (and gubernatorial hopeful) Karen Handel, according to the Associated Press. Georgia is one of eight states to consider proof of citizenship requirements this year, and is already home to one of the strictest voter ID laws in the nation.

"Voting rights advocates complained that the new Georgia voter registration bill raises some of the same constitutional concerns as the state's original photo ID law by mandating that voters have identification that costs money to obtain," the AP reported.

Increasingly gaining popularity as a reform for "election integrity," citizenship requirements have the potential to affect millions of Americans, including low-income and women voters. Polling data by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law explains how citizenship requirements before registering to vote creates obstacles to voting:

- 13 million individuals do not have ready access to documentation, including passports, naturalization papers, or birth certificates

- 12 percent of citizens earning less thatn $25,000 per year do not have ready access to documentation

- Less than half (48%) of voting age women with ready access to citizenship documents have them with current, legal name.

If it passes a citizenship requirement, Georgia would join Arizona in legalizing voter disenfranchisement. Since adopting the measure in 2004, more than 38,000 voter registration applications in Arizona have been thrown out, according to a May 2008 report in the New York Times. "More than 70 percent of those registrations came from people who stated under oath that they were born in the United States, the data showed."

"Current Georgia law requires those registering to vote only to 'swear or affirm' that they are a U.S. citizen by checking a box on the application," the AP reports. While there were no figures to prove non-citizen voting is an issue in Georgia, Handel's office claims it is "investigating several allegations of non-citizens registering to vote," but could not say who made the allegation or how many claims have been made, according to AP. Instead Handel's spokesperson offered flimsy evidence of a currently challenged 2008 effort to verify citizenship of new voter applicants, which found "4,700 people who might not be citizens."

It was "never determined whether any of those flagged voters were, in fact, not citizens," the AP reports.

To monitor the progress of Georgia's proof-of-citizenship bills, visit www.ElectionLegislation.org.

Quick Links:
"Citizens Without Proof: A Survey of Americans' Documentary Proof of Citizenship and Photo Identification." The Brennan Center For Justice. November 2006.

In Other News:

Voter ID, early voting bill passes - Hattiesburg American [Miss.]
Mississippians will be able to vote early and must show photo identification at the polls in a bill that cleared the state House on Wednesday.

Election official proposes change to Minnesota laws - Rochester Post Bulletin [Minn.]
ST. PAUL -- Minnesota's top election official on Wednesday proposed dozens of changes to state law after an unsettled Senate race put a microscope on everything from absentee balloting to the recount process.

Several States Debating Election Day Registration to Expand Access to the Polls

project vote — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 21:20:54 GMT

Cross-Posted at Project Vote's Voting Matter's Blog

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

by Erin Ferns

Election Day Registration has been the subject of election reform debates for decades and the year following one of the most historic presidential elections makes no exception. As lawmakers in at least 16 states hope to expand access to voter registration and effectively increase voter participation, skeptics of such reforms raise the fear of voter fraud. Today, 10 states successfully practice Same-Day Registration (either on Election Day or during an early voting period), with above-average turnout rates and no reported problems with voter fraud. For those states considering EDR, the decision to efficiently expand access to democracy should be clear.
Since the 1970s, 10 states have implemented Same-Day Registration with average turnout rates that are 10-12 percentage points higher than national averages, according to research and public policy group, Demos. Despite the growing acceptance of EDR across the country and its smooth implementation for 35 years there is still stiff resistance to adopting such policies in a majority of states.

After years of introducing and failing to pass EDR bills, New Mexico's House committee finally approved a bill providing for registration and voting both during the early voting period and on Election Day. However, this bill, HB 52, may not survive in its current form if EDR supporters cave to voter fraud hysterics raised by state Republicans who claim being on the border raises vulnerability, despite the fact that there is no history of voter fraud in the state, according to the Santa Fe New Mexican.

The voter fraud argument against EDR is not unique to New Mexico; opponents of EDR measures frequently claim that the possibility of voter fraud is heightened when voters are allowed to register and vote at the same time. However, a study on voter fraud in EDR states found only 10 incidents of voter fraud in six EDR states over the course of three election cycles (1999-2005). "Of these, there was only one case of voter impersonation at the polls," in which a 17-year-old boy voted on behalf of his father, an instance unrelated to EDR, according to a 2007 Demos report.

The other isolated voter fraud problems that led to federal investigation "were directly attributable to clerical errors, poll worker shortages and incompetence, not any organized scheme or intent on the part of voters to scam the system," according to the report.

If administered efficiently, residents who register at the polls are required to substantiate their residency and the entire registration process is carried out under the supervision of an elections official on the same day, limiting the chance for errors or fraud.

"Advocates of same-day voting say it increases voter participation and makes it easier for those who have moved from another state," the New Mexican reports. "William Mee of Voter Services Coalition told the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee that many people are disenfranchised by failing to register in time."

Failure to register in time is not just an issue of "laziness" or last-minute political interest. Other issues such as clerical errors, voter purges, and high mobility rates are often reason for voters to be unknowingly left off of voter rolls. EDR would help short-circuit purge and suppression attempts by allowing these individuals a "fail-safe" opportunity to correct registration errors and increase their voter turnout rates.

Allowing citizens to register and vote on Election Day would also ameliorate issues surrounding provisional balloting, an option that is often utilized by underrepresented voters who are more likely to encounter registration problems. Provisional ballot counting procedures vary from state to state, rendering many legitimate ballots ineligible if not cast within the correct county or even precinct. For example, acceptance rates of provisional ballots in 2004 varied from 96 percent in Alaska to just four percent in Delaware, according to a 2006 Project Vote report.

As if the lack of voter fraud and the elimination of the risk of voter disenfranchisement wasn't enough to prove EDR is a viable and effective election reform, Patty O'Connor, an election official from long-time EDR state, Minnesota "told the [N.M. House] committee that it has worked well in her state," the New Mexican reports. Based on figures from the United States Elections Project, Minnesota's voter turnout rate exceeded the national average by at least 16 percentage points in 2008.

Despite being met with resistance from the GOP, the New Mexico bill is supported by the County Clerks Association "if the registration is limited to early voting." Although HB 52 sponsor, (Rep. Jim Trujillo, D-Santa Fe) supports this idea, he is being "urged...to keep Election Day registration in the bill" by committee chairwoman Rep. Gail Chasey, D-Albuquerque. The bill is currently in the House Voters and Elections Committee.

Quick Links:
Case Study: Election Day Registration. electionline.org. February 2007.

In Other News:

Exemption removed from voter ID bill - Associated Press
JACKSON - The Republican-controlled Mississippi Senate reversed course Wednesday on part of an election bill by saying that all voters, not just those below retirement age, would have to show photo identification at the polls.

Voter ID bill would make Minnesota laws most restictive in the nation - The Minnesota Independent
House Republicans are urging passage of a bill to require every Minnesotan to have a government-issued photo identification in order to vote in the state. The bill (HF 57) introduced by Rep. Tom Emmer, R-Delano, would make Minnesota's voting laws among the most restrictive in the nation.

ACLU attacks voter registration bill - Associated Press
ATLANTA - A bill introduced in the state Senate that would require proof of citizenship when you register to vote is under attack.

Equal Voting Rights Still In Question in 2009

project vote — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 00:58:55 GMT

Cross-Posted at Project Vote's Voting Matter's Blog

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

by Erin Ferns

After the voters spoke last November by turning out in record numbers, we enter a new year with a new president and multiple new agendas for election administration in the states that bring both excitement and concern from voting rights advocates. Whether the discussion is about upholding the landmark Voting Rights Act, the disenfranchisement that comes with voter ID, or even the distribution of provisional ballots, the conclusion remains the same: we should work to protect and facilitate every eligible citizens' right to vote, not impede it.
In spite of our advances as a nation, the New York Times argues that we still face political and racial tensions, necessitating protections guaranteed under a currently challenged section of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The Saturday editorial writes on the origin of the law, particularly Section 5, which was explicitly written to halt voter suppression tactics that were brazenly used to "stop blacks from voting or being elected to office." The law, reauthorized by Congress in 2006, is being challenged by a municipal utility district in Texas that argues that Section 5 of the law "is unconstitutional, and...imposes too many burdens on jurisdictions covered by it."

"Discrimination against minority voters may not be as blatant as it was then, but it still exists," the Times wrote. "District lines are drawn to prevent minorities from winning; polling places are located in places hard for minority voters to get to; voter ID requirements are imposed with the purpose of suppressing the minority vote."

Meanwhile Voter ID, a leading election issue that also disproportionately disadvantages minority voters, is facing debate in at least 12 state legislatures this year, including Alabama and Minnesota.

The recently introduced "Voter Integrity Act of 2009," a photo ID bill, brings warnings from Minnesota voting rights advocates who claim the law is at best unnecessary and, at worst, a deterrent for voters, according to local broadcast news outlet, KARE 11.

"There is no evidence of voter fraud in Minnesota," said Dan McGrath, Executive Director from Take Action Minnesota. "On November 4 we received calls from people who couldn't figure out what they needed to register to vote. If this [bill] is passed I think it will make an already confusing process more confusing...and will make it difficult for the elderly and other's who don't have a driver's license."

Despite the lack of evidence of voter fraud in the state, bill author, Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Delano) attempted to justify the risk of disenfranchising voters by saying "every law that has to do with voting will inconvenience someone in some way." he said.

Allegations of "voter fraud" are not only used to create unnecessary and potentially harmful laws like voter ID, but also to undermine efforts to facilitate voter participation like Same Day Registration, which, studies show, can increase voter turnout by as much as 10 percent.

Last fall, Ohio implemented a new procedure that allowed voters to register and cast in-person absentee ballots during the early voting period, a procedure that Hamilton County, Ohio Prosecutor Joe Deters alleged to be rife with voter fraud. However, the allegation was recently found to be a grossly misreported and highly partisan effort to negate legitimate votes, according to the Cincinnati Enquirer on Tuesday.

Deters, "who was Southwest Ohio regional chairman of Republican John McCain's presidential campaign" had "specifically asked at that time that more than 600 votes cast between Sep. 30 and Oct. 6 - the 'golden week' - be investigated because of the allegations of widespread voter fraud."

"Ultimately...the investigators discovered 'get-out-the-vote' practices, sponsored by community organizations, which took full advantage of this unique absentee-voting period, but no evidence these practices violated Ohio law," according to a report by Special Prosecutor Michael O'Neill.

And, "the only criminal case stemming from Deters allegations of widespread voter fraud last fall was against a Connecticut man," who ended up turning himself in, the Enquirer wrote.

Ohio remains in election-related news not just for voter fraud myths and Same Day Registration battles, but for its "inaccurate voter-registration lists and a needlessly confusing voter-identification law" that cause the state to rely too much on "potentially disputed" provisional ballots, according to the Akron Beacon Journal.

Provisional ballots, given to voters who find that they are not enrolled to vote at their polling place, were publicly scrutinized during the 2008 presidential election for the uneven treatment across the states. "In 2004, 1.9 million provisional ballots were cast nationwide, of which 676,000 weren't counted,"according to an October 2008 Wall Street Journal report. "In the 2006 election, 20% of the 800,000 provisional ballots were discarded."

"No election will ever reach perfection, and it is difficult to envision a battleground state such as Ohio escaping lawsuits given the scrutiny that has grown common since the 2000 presidential meltdown," the Beacon Journal editorializes. "But in the end, reducing the number of provisional ballots is not just about avoiding lawsuits, although that's a worthy goal. It's about making the system as user-friendly as possible, expanding turnout even beyond what Barack Obama achieved last year."

Quick Links:
www.ElectionLegislation.org

In Other News:

Perry delivers speech to Legislature - Associated Press
...Perry said he agrees with Republican Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst on requiring more voter identification...

Early option for polls gets Gov. Henry's vote - The Oklahoman
Oklahoma voters should have more time to take part in early voting, Gov. Brad Henry said Wednesday.

LAWRENCE: Felons' voting rights debated - The Princeton Packet [N.J.]
Charles Holman has a simple request. He wants to register to vote.

All Cost, No Benefit: States Aim to Raise Voting Barriers to Prevent Rare Crime

project vote — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 20:45:07 GMT

Cross-Posted at Project Vote's Voting Matter's Blog

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

by Erin Ferns

As we predicted last December, legislation designed to prevent so-called voter fraud has dominated election law debates in several states this year. Last week alone, Georgia's controversial voter ID law was upheld by a federal appeals panel, the Texas Senate "sparked deep partisan tensions" by eliminating the majority rule in order to aid the passage of a voter ID law, and nine more states introduced numerous voter ID bills.
With several studies pointing to the potential disenfranchisement of certain communities, including already underrepresented elderly, young, minority and low income voters that disproportionately tend to not have photo ID, along with the fact that there is no significant evidence of polling-place voter impersonation anywhere in the country, this largely partisan debate appears to have only one cost - the right to vote - and no benefit.

According to the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, as many as 11 percent of U.S. citizens would not be able to the meet strict government issued photo ID mandates that five states currently enforce and several more are considering. Based on U.S. mobility figures, the number of Americans unable to present ID with current address is just as significant. According to U.S. Census data, between 2005 and 2006, 13 percent of Americans changed residence, an average that skyrockets when reviewing mobility among voting age youth and minorities. Whereas 21 million Americans would be unable to prove identity to meet these strict requirements, no one has been able to prove there is any real problem with voter impersonation at the polls

On Jan. 14, a three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the oft-challenged Georgia voter ID law, claiming that concerns of disenfranchising voters were simply "outweighed by the interests of Georgia in safeguarding the right to vote." However, the law's most recent challenger, the NAACP, "claims the state never proved a valid reason for the new requirements," according to the Associated Press. The group estimates that between 289,000 and 505,000 Georgians do not have a driver's licenses and "argued it was 'implausible' that all of them would have another form of approved ID."

Using a similar argument that voter ID was imperative to protect the "fundamental right to vote," Republicans have "sparked deep partisan tension in Texas" by moving to weaken filibuster rules with the ultimate purpose of advancing a voter ID bill, according to the Associated Press. The voter ID fight is nothing new to the state, which had "deadlocked on the issue two years ago."

Although Governor Rick Perry recently claimed that asking for voter ID "is not asking too much" in a Jan. 15 Fort Worth Star-Telegram report, he did not cite a reason why the state would need such a law in the first place. Republican Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst claims protecting the right to vote while preventing voter fraud is key, saying that "at the end of the day, there is nothing more fundamental than the right to vote and the sanctity of one person, one vote." However, a recent investigation by the state Attorney General's office found 22 prosecutions for election-related crimes, none of which are cases of voter impersonation at the polls, the only crime a voter ID law would prevent, according to the Star-Telegram on Tuesday.

Therefore, "there is no reason to believe that there is a need for more onerous identification requirements to ensure election security," said Dustin Rynders, an attorney with Advocacy Inc, a group that represents people with disabilities.

Like Georgia and Texas - states that have yet to prove the necessity for voter ID - Mississippi Sen. David Jordan (D-Greenwood) concluded that the state had no "significant number of cases of fraud involving voter ID" after pressing Republican Elections Committee Chairman Terry Burton for examples of how voter ID could have prevented voter fraud.

Just as the evidence of voter fraud is lacking in the state, so is the concern for voters who would be affected by a voter ID requirement. Last week, the Mississippi Senate passed a voter ID bill, much to the disappointment of Republican officials who disapproved of an added provision exempting voters born before 1946 from the providing voter ID, according to the Associated Press. The provision, added by Sen. David Blount (D-Jackson), appeared to lessen opposition to the bill, lending to its passage.

''We need a law that respects our seniors, especially those who personally experienced having their constitutional right to vote denied,'' Blount said.

With Republican officials considering the exemption of elderly voters a "loophole," the bill has since been held on a motion to reconsider, "a move designed to get a stronger bill," according to the Desoto Times earlier this week.

A similar bill in the House also received criticisms by state Republican Chairman Brad White, who said it was "watered down" election reform that would "do nothing to enhance the security or integrity of our election system," according to another AP report.

Last week, nine states filed or introduced bills to require voters to present identification at the polls. To monitor these bills, visit www.ElectionLegislation.org (registration required).

Quick Links:
Voter ID Requirements Web Page. Project Vote.
Policy Brief on Voter Identification. Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. 2006.
Minnite, Lorraine. The Politics of Voter Fraud. Project Vote. March 2007.
Citizens Without Proof: A Survey of Americans' Possession of Documentary Proof of Citizenship and Photo Identification. Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. 2006.
Barreto, M. et. al. The Disproportionate Impact of Indiana Voter ID Requirements on the Electorate. Nov. 2007.
Hood, M.V. And Charles S. Bullock. Worth a Thousand Words? An Analysis of Georgia's Voter Identification Statute. University of Georgia. 2007.

In Other News:

Make Absentee Voting Easier for Military Members - Roll Call
Ever since the 2000 election's Florida controversy, problems with absentee voting by our military personnel overseas have been on the minds of election reformers - but not so much on the agenda of election officials.

Bills aim to recast elections - Tulsa World [Okla.]
OKLAHOMA CITY - A number of bills filed for the upcoming session propose changes to the state's election laws.

Disenfranchisement Reform: Lawmakers Move Toward Expanding Voting Rights in 2009

project vote — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 23:17:49 GMT

Cross-Posted at Project Vote's Voting Matter's Blog

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

by Erin Ferns

The 2008 presidential election was an inspiration for many citizens to take part in the American democratic process, including first-time voter and convicted felon Eric Stephen Willems of Minnesota. Unfortunately, that vote cost Willems, who was on probation, a trip back to jail, according to the Associated Press last week.
Before voting on Election Day, Willems left a telephone message with his probation officer of his plans to vote, as he was required to do under "intensive supervised release." He was later called back and informed that he had just committed a felony.

When asked if he had been informed of his loss of voting rights upon release from prison, (a commonly neglected procedure that often leaves former felons confused and unnecessarily disenfranchised or, in Willems' case, casting illegal votes) Willems claims he "must have gapped out" that information.

"I was just excited that the presidential election was coming up and I would be able to vote," Willems said. "I had never voted in my life."

Like many states, Minnesota disenfranchises convicted felons until all terms of their sentences are complete, an issue that advocates and lawmakers have long battled over, weighing the cost of stripping citizens who have already paid their debt to society of their civil rights and the subsequent impact it has on social re-integration.

This year looks promising for disenfranchisement reform as "the issue continued to garner editorial support in the media, gain legislative momentum from policymakers, and catch the attention of researchers and advocates alike" in 2008, according to criminal justice public policy group, the Sentencing Project in a recent news report.

Today, more than five million people are not allowed to vote as a result of felony conviction. "As many as four million of these people live, work and raise families in our communities, but because of a conviction in their past they are still denied the right to vote," according to a 2008 report by Erika Wood of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, a leading advocate for automatic post-incarceration restoration of voting rights "in each of the 35 states that still disenfranchise people who are no longer in prison."

Under a system of automatic post-incarceration restoration of rights, "citizens released from prison would be immediately eligible to vote while on probation and parole, as are those who are sentenced to probation without serving any time in prison," wrote Wood. "These citizens would be permitted to register in precisely the same way as other eligible citizens, without submission of special paperwork."

While advocates like the Brennan Center push for such reforms, expanding voting rights to all citizens - including former felons - has become the focus of lawmakers on the both the state and federal levels. Since 1997, 19 states have amended felon disenfranchisement policies, leading to the restoration of voting rights for at least 760,000 people, according to a 2008 Sentencing Project report.

Last fall, two federal bills were introduced to secure the federal voting rights of individuals who are no longer incarcerated. Although neither bill progressed in the Congress, another bill was introduced for the 2009 session just last week. House Bill 59, sponsored by Rep. Jesse Jackson (D-IL), is currently in the Judiciary committee. On the state level, several legislatures are pre-filing and introducing bills related to felon voting rights, most of which are designed to reduce current restrictions. For example, Wyoming Rep. Dan Zwonitzer (R-Cheyenne) is sponsoring a bill to reduce the waiting period for non-violent criminals to restore their voting rights, according to local publication, the Caspar Star-Tribune. Currently, all former felons in Wyoming must wait five years to have their voting rights restored.

States considering legislation to expand voting rights to certain felons include Georgia, Kentucky (which currently is one of two states to permanently disenfranchise felons), New Jersey, New York, Texas, and Virginia. At this time, Mississippi is the only state to introduce legislation to increase felon voting restrictions (S 2443 and SCR 514). Visit www.electionlegislation.org for more information on these bills.

Quick Links:

Felon Voting Laws By State. Project Vote. 12 Sept. 2008.

Restoring Voting Rights to Former Felons. Project Vote. 2007.

In Other News:

Federal panel upholds Georgia voter ID requirement - Associated Press
ATLANTA - An oft-challenged Georgia law that requires voters to show photo identification before they cast their ballots was again upheld Wednesday, this time by a federal appeals panel.

Early partisan bitterness erupts in Texas Senate over voter identification laws - Associated Press
AUSTIN -- It didn't take long for partisan bitterness and the simmering battle over voter identification laws to mar what was supposed to be a peaceful start of the 2009 Texas Legislature.

Mills wants birth certificate required for voter registration - Gainesville Times [Ga.]
GAINESVILLE - State Rep. James Mills, R-Chestnut Mountain, introduced a bill Monday that would require voters registering for the first time to present their birth certificate.

Bill to ban election-day voter registration swamped by opponents - Billings Gazette [Mont.]
HELENA - Groups representing college students, the elderly, American Indians, women, labor unions and environmentalists turned out in force Tuesday to oppose a Bozeman Republican's bill that would no longer allow people to register to vote on Election Day.