Open Left - voter ID

All Voters are Unequal: Voter ID Law Exposed as Unfair, States Still Follow Suit

project vote — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 04:00:00 GMT

When an appellate court shut down Indiana's unequal mandate for polling-place voter ID, it sent a clear signal that-partisan politics aside-election laws should be assessed on whether or not all voters are given equal access to the democratic process. Yet, despite violations of law and the fact that absentee voting is more susceptible to voter fraud activity than in-person voting, other states continue to emulate what was one of the country's toughest voter ID laws.

While it has long been held (and proven) by voting rights advocates that voter ID is harmful to voters that do not have or cannot obtain required ID (primarily young, low income, and minority voters), the Indiana court's recent decision was based on entirely different criteria. The case was brought on the argument that "Indiana's Constitution requires all voters to be treated uniformly, and that the ID law treats absentee voters and in-person voters differently," wrote Sheila Kennedy, a professor of law and public policy at the Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs in an Indianapolis Star opinion editorial Monday.

"The court unanimously agreed. If the legislature wants to keep the law, in other words, it'll have to apply it to all voters, not just those who show up in person."

However, "partisan politics" shroud the very simple argument that all voters should have the law applied fairly as voter ID supporters scramble to keep the voter ID battle afloat.

In response to Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniel's declaration that the judges' decision was "preposterous...partisan politics," Kennedy wrote that his "rhetoric is unfortunate on a number of levels. It betrays unfamiliarity with the arguments involved, and -- worse -- paints judges as no more than partisans in robes. Such attacks, as the Indiana Bar Association pointed out, undermine the legitimacy of the judicial system."

"In other words," she wrote, "the judges weren't the ones playing politics."

This year, 25 states introduced variations of Indiana's law in their own legislatures. Many failed to see the light of day, but battles are expected in at least five states next year, including Oklahoma, Kansas, Minnesota, Tennessee, and Mississippi.

Mississippi has battled voter ID in the state legislature for years and-in an attempt to circumvent the legislature in 2010-had plans to put an initiative on the state ballot for voters to decide. However, last week, Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann announced that a Republican sponsored voter ID referendum would not be on the ballot until November 2011 due to complications with state law regarding signature gathering, according to the Associated Press. Hosemann's office collected almost 19,000 signatures while the state Republican Party has 40,000. Ninety thousand signatures are required to put the voter ID initiative on the ballot.

The postponement of the referendum is raising suspicions among some. "With statewide elections coming in 2011, GOP officials may be counting on a voter ID referendum to help boost its turnout," a Mississippi publication, the Greenwood Commonwealth editorialized Monday. "There is arguably a lot more at stake for the party in 2011 than the congressional elections in 2010.

"That said, the delay could serve a useful purpose if it focuses the public's attention and that of lawmakers on where the problem of voter fraud really lies - absentee balloting."

Indiana Voter ID Law Found Unconstitutional and Disenfranchising

project vote — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross-posted to Project Voting Matters Blog

One of the country's most contentious voting rights issues came back into the spotlight last Thursday when an Indiana court struck down the state's strict photo voter ID law as unconstitutional. The law, which was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2008, was found be in violation of the Indiana Constitution because it treated voters unequally.
According to the Indianapolis Star, the three-judge panel held that the law-one of the country's toughest voter ID requirements-unfairly exempts absentee voters (the main source of voter fraud) and residents of state-licensed care facilities that happen to be polling places. This exemption, the court contends, is in violation of the state constitution's Equal Privileges and Immunities Clause, which provides that "the General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen or class of citizens, privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens."

"Under Indiana law, the court said, it might be reasonable to regulate absentee balloting more stringently than in-person balloting," the New York Times reported. "But the voter ID law does the opposite, the judges said, by imposing 'a less stringent requirement for absentee voters than for those voting in person.'"

Voter ID laws have gained a reputation for being the product of partisan politics, with Republican policymakers pushing such measures to fight the extremely rare phenomenon of polling-place voter fraud, while Democratic leaders assert that voter ID unnecessarily disenfranchises the country's young, minority, and low-income voters. Evidence of either have been difficult to prove on a substantial scale, though plaintiffs challenging the law in the U.S. Supreme Court case, Crawford v. Marion County Board of Elections were "primarily criticized for their failure to generate firm evidence of disfranchisement," according to a recent Indiana University School of Law report that examines and documents voter disenfranchisement as a result voter ID in Indiana in 2008.

"Our research helps begin to fill this gap in the plaintiffs' case and presents the clearest evidence yet that photo identification has a disfranchising impact on hundreds of persons who want to have their democratic voice heard."

The report surveys "92 counties in Indiana to determine how many persons arrived at the polls without valid identification, cast a provisional ballot, and then had that provisional ballot counted." Out of 2.8 million votes cast in Indiana on Election Day 2008, it was determined that at least 900 votes were not counted due to lack of sufficient ID. (More than 1,000 people arrived at the polls without valid ID and voted provisionally - only 137 of those votes were actually counted.)

"The major difference between the state court decision and the Supreme Court's decision ...is that the state court was interpreting the Indiana Constitution, while the Supreme Court interpreted the Constitution of the United States," the Times reported. "Generally, state courts are given the last word in interpreting their own constitutions."

In spite of both evidence of disenfranchisement and violations of the Indiana Constitution, state officials "ridiculed the decision and said it would be appealed to the State Supreme Court," according to the Times. "At a news conference, Gov. Mitch Daniels, a second-term Republican, called the ruling 'preposterous' and said that 'there's nothing in the Indiana Constitution that goes beyond what the federal Constitution provides here.'"

The controversial - and now unconstitutional law - set a precedent for more than 25 state legislatures that introduced similar measures during the 2009 legislative sessions. So far, Utah is the only state to enact such a bill this year, which was reportedly implemented with few problems, though it was tested in a low-turnout election, according to the Associated Press last week.

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.

Politics and Media Frenzy Feed Voter ID Battles; Efforts to Make Voting More Accessible Go Under Ra

project vote — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

By Erin Ferns

Although there are other election reforms - good and bad - that deserve the spotlight, voter ID remains a hot button issue for legislators and the media, primarily in Southern states. These battles are drawing as much attention for their political divisiveness as for the unfair burden they put on voters.
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear a case on the oft-challenged Georgia voter ID law, thereby upholding a three judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that the "state's voter ID law is final," according to the Associated Press. The high court's decision to not hear the case comes as no surprise to voting rights advocates, considering its 2008 ruling to uphold another strict ID law in Indiana, the AP reports. The state is currently being scrutinized by the U.S. Department of Justice for its discriminatory voter list maintenance procedure, which haphazardly checked for voters' citizenship, and may also be under review for the recent passage of a controversial bill requiring all voter applicants to present proof of citizenship before being registered to vote.

Still, the fight to amend or abolish Georgia's strict law does not appear to be over. The AP reports that yet another lawsuit over the law is still in state courts. Additionally, "the next step for voter ID opponents would be legislative, [Laughlin McDonald, director of the ACLU voting rights project] McDonald said, but that would have to take place in Congress."

"I don't think the state of Georgia ... will change its mind," he said. One of the state's biggest supporters of its controversial election laws--which are frequently challenged for being discriminatory if not disenfranchising--is Secretary of State Karen Handel, who also plans to run for governor in 2010.

Two state legislatures with highly publicized voter ID battles this session have come to an explosive but inconclusive ending that only points to another spirited round in the near future. Last week, a Texas voter ID bill and political games were blamed for stalling any significant bill movement in the legislature. After failing to pass a similar law in the past, the Republican-controlled Senate "changed long-standing Senate rules on the second day of the session to guarantee the passing of a voter ID bill on their side of the Capitol," the San Antonio Express-News reported. In the last week of the legislative session, House Democrats kept the bill from reaching the House floor, letting it die along with other unrelated bills.

House Speaker Joe Straus lamented in March that such issues "suck all the political oxygen out of a session" and that they "shouldn't dominate the legislative session when we have a very challenging economy, a long-term budget problem in Texas that's going to be completely ignored for two more years."

"Both sides are taking a really hard position and exaggerating it," said Straus. "Democrats exaggerate the danger of a more modest bill, and Republicans exaggerate the depth of the problem that needs to be addressed."

On Tuesday, Republican Governor Rick Perry announced that the state will hold a special session, though he did not indicate when it would be or whether the voter ID fight may be rehashed, according the Dallas Morning News. Perry and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurt are among the state's biggest voter ID supporters. They "are running in next spring's GOP primary - and Voter ID remains one of those red-meat issues for hard-core Republicans," according to the Express-News.

Nor does the battle appear to be over in another state with a widely publicized voter ID fight this session. Mississippi Senator Joey Fillingane (R-Sumrall) declared "victory" when a judge declined to make a judgment on how signatures should be collected to put a voter ID initiative on the ballot, according to the Associated Press. The question was if the signatures should come from the five former House districts, or the current four. Although the legislature failed to pass any of the nine voter ID bills introduced this year, Fillingane, along with voter ID advocates, Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann and Attorney General Jim Hood agreed that signatures should come from the five former House districts.

"Voter ID has been a hot-button issue at the Capitol for more than a decade. Hosemann and other supporters say it can prevent fraud at the polls," the AP reported. "Opponents say there's little evidence of people voting under the names of others. They also believe an ID requirement could diminish turnout among older black voters who still recall the Jim Crow era poll taxes and literacy tests."

Fillingane said he has collected 10,000 signatures in support of a constitutional amendment for a strict voter ID law. He needs a total of 90,000 to get the proposal on the statewide ballot.

Although not as hyped Texas and Mississippi, some active state legislatures have quietly moved bills relating to photo ID requirements, both restrictive and expansive, in the last week.

A photo ID bill passed the Rhode Island House last week, though it is unclear that its passage through one chamber indicates any viability. A similar photo ID bill recently failed in a Tennessee House subcommittee after passing the Senate, according to the Associated Press.

Although not nearly as popular as bills to enact photo ID, at least two of the eight states with photo ID laws have introduced legislation to expand the list of acceptable voter ID in order to make voting more accessible for voters who lack the necessary ID. These states include Arizona and Indiana. While Indiana adjourned in May without passing any significant election bills, Arizona recently moved identical bills, HB 2627 and SB 1344 to expand the state required voter ID list to include Military IDs, U.S. passports, and driver's licenses with outdated addresses.

The House bill was adopted by the House on Tuesday and the Senate bill is currently in both the Senate Judiciary and Rules Committees.

To monitor Arizona's SB 1344 and other voter ID 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.

Voter Fraud Myth Used to Push Voting Policies that Harken Back to the Jim Crow Era

project vote — Sat, 09 May 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

By Erin Ferns

Recent studies show that a more diverse electorate turned out last November, including historically underrepresented young and minority voters. Since the election, Republican operatives have continued to use the specter of voter fraud to loosen regulations on voter suppression activities while pushing policies to make voting more difficult for the crop of new voters.
Last week we reported how the Republican National Committee (RNC) had quietly filed a motion to dissolve a consent decree prohibiting them from practicing voter caging and other voter suppression activities. The decree had been established in the 1980s after so-called "ballot security programs" to prevent voter fraud resulted in wrongful voter disenfranchisement of largely low-income and minority voters.

"The RNC claims that the lack of evidence of voter fraud is due to liberal voting laws that make fraud hard to detect," said Project Vote election counsel, Teresa James in last week's column. "Yet legislatures in the past decade have pushed through the most restrictive voting codes we've seen since the Jim Crow era. Complicated voter ID rules, barriers to voter registration, and arbitrary rules on verifying provisional or absentee ballots all disenfranchise qualified voters, especially minority voters. Despite this frenzy of allegedly anti-fraud legislation, this political party wants carte blanche to also use questionable tactics that suppress targeted voters, all in the name of mythical voter fraud."

Mythical voter fraud is currently being used in states with widely reported battles to pass strict voter identification requirements as their legislative sessions come down to the wire.

Last week, Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan spoke in defense of the 230,000 eligible voters in the state who would be disenfranchised because they lack the necessary ID required under pending House Joint Resolution 9. The effort to pass a strict voter ID law continues despite a similar bill's failure to pass last year as well as a recent report by Carnahan's office that showed there were no instances of voter impersonation at the polls during the last three elections.

According to the Richmond Daily News, "the amendment would provide free government issued photo ID cards to voters" - a provision that other states with pending voter ID battles are considering. However, Carnahan's study points out that "documents needed to obtain the ID can be hard or expensive to obtain," referring to a Jefferson City man who would be "a perfect example of someone who would be denied the right to vote."

"I have my Illinois birth certificate, but I was turned away because it doesn't have a raised seal," said 25-year-old citizen, Greg Butler. "I'm trying to get a new copy from Illinois, but the process is complicated. If this passed, I'm worried that I wouldn't be able to vote in Missouri."

"It's my job to protect the rights of all Missouri voters," said Carnahan. "This proposal would make it difficult or impossible for thousands of eligible Missourians to cast a ballot. I hope our legislators will take a closer look at this list and see that there are people in communities all over the state who risk being disenfranchised by this proposal."

According to Carnahan's April 2009 report on the 2008 election, election administration problems dealing with long lines, overzealous poll workers who wrongfully asked for photo ID, and confused voters who were unaware that they needed to re-register every time they change residence in order to be eligible to vote were the real issues in the election, not polling place fraud. In fact, only one St. Louis voter illegally cast an absentee ballot for his recently deceased mother, a case that was not only caught by authorities, but would also have not been prevented under a photo ID provision since it was a mail ballot.

"This single instance showed that the security checks in place are effective at keeping Missouri elections fair and free of fraud," Carnahan reported.

A voter ID bill in Texas will likely reach the House floor if a "compromise" to allow voters to show two forms of non-photo ID is included among other provisions, over the objections of House Representatives who prefer a stricter photo ID requirement, according to the Dallas Morning News.

Earlier this year, the much publicized voter ID debate "conjured up the civil rights struggles of the 1960s" as Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Fort Worth)" said "proposals for tighter ID measures are the modern equivalent of the Jim Crow laws that were used to suppress minority turnout for decades," according to the Associated Press in April.

"This is a racial issue, make no mistake about it," said Veasey. "Can you really sleep with yourself at night knowing that if this bill is passed, that most of the people that would be denied the right to vote are going to be black, brown and poor?"

Rep. Todd Smith's so-called compromise bill attempts to "mitigate the potential for disenfranchisement," a "natural" outcome of voter ID, according to Rep. Rafael Anchia (D-Dallas), the Morning News reported. The compromise, "designed to draw support across party lines," includes provisions for increased funding for voter registration efforts in the state as well as "free identification for people who need it to vote."

Unlike Missouri and Texas where high profile battles to pass strict photo ID laws have occurred in recent years, the Rhode Island House Judiciary Committee shocked voters and advocates by supporting photo ID legislation 11-2 last week. According to the Providence Journal, "it was believed to be the first time that any Rhode Island legislative committee has approved such a requirement."

The bill, HB 5097 requires all voters to present a document that shows the voter's name and photograph. A state voter ID would be issued upon request "at locations and in accordance with procedures established by rules and regulations promulgated by the secretary of state," according to the bill's text.

A statement issued by the ACLU and a coalition of organizations deemed the bill more harmful than helpful. "Rather than putting hurdles in the way of voters, lawmakers should be working to lower barriers to voter participation," according to the Providence Journal. "Should the bill become law, it would 'lead to the disenfranchisement of thousands of voters in Rhode Island, and particularly racial minorities, the elderly, and people with disabilities.'"

To monitor voter ID 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.

Around the Country, Calls for Lawmakers to Address "Real Problems, Not Imaginary Ones"

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

As several states enter critical phases in their legislative sessions, the debate for one of the most controversial election reforms continues to dominate headlines and legislative hearings. This year, more than 26 states introduced legislation to go above and beyond federal election law relating to voter ID, despite near consensus among voting rights advocates that it hurts the process far more than it helps. Last week, the hysteria around voter ID reached an all time high in six states, evoking public concern from advocates and citizens alike.
The once divisive issue now has citizens questioning their states lawmakers' obsession with voter ID when there are larger problems in the administration of elections - including voter access issues - that trump the virtually non-existent issue of polling place voter fraud.

"We should be thinking of ways to make voting easier and more accessible to people, rather than scheming up ways to disenfranchise voters," said Pennsylvania resident Tim McCann in a Philadelphia Intelligencer letter to the editor last week. McCann criticized the Intelligencer for supporting voter ID in the state in a March 25 editorial.

"Some states are experimenting with Internet voting, early voting and voting by mail. Instead, we have a bunch of Republican senators who are trying to make it harder to vote - and your newspaper is supporting that effort."

McCann's sentiment was voiced by a number of voting rights advocates who ultimately pressured the Senate to "delay further action" on voter ID last week, according to another March 25 Intelligencer report.

"There's not an issue with impersonation voter fraud" (the only type of illegal activity a voter ID law would prevent), Kathy Boockvar of the nonpartisan group Advancement Project told the Intelligencer.

"Many people, including legislators, may not realize that as many as 25 percent of African Americans, 18 percent of senior citizens, and 15 percent of low-income Americans simply do not have the types of current photo ID required by this bill," Boockvar said.

While the threat of voter ID in Pennsylvania is now in limbo, citizens and advocates in South Carolina and Tennessee are broadcasting their dissent for pending bills in their states.

In a Tennessean opinion piece last week, ACLU National Board Representative Joseph Sweat commented on how his 82-year-old mother in law - who had been voting "since Harry Truman ran for president in 1948" - would be disenfranchised by pending voter ID bills in Tennessee that conflict with current, unrelated law. Sweat's mother-in-law "took advantage of the Tennessee law that allows drivers over 65 to choose not to have their photographs on their driver's license," he wrote. "So, for abiding by this law she may soon be denied the right to vote unless she goes through a lot of unnecessary and downright un-American hassle and expense."

Calling it a "straw man" argument because "proponents of voter ID have failed over and over again to demonstrate that individual voter fraud is a pervasive problem anywhere in the country," Sweat said the passage of such law would equate to a poll tax, impose more problems at the polling place, and cost taxpayers several hundred thousands of dollars despite the already existing economic crisis in the state.

Sweat concluded that, with the state already in economic crisis, the associated costs might quash legislators' thirst for passing one of the seven pending ID bills. Currently, Senate Bill 150 is the only bill to have advanced in the Tenn. legislature in the last week.

A widely reported - and widely opposed - South Carolina voter ID bill (SB 3418) would reportedly affect the voting rights of 343,000 South Carolinians, The bill was scheduled to be heard last week, according to the Associated Press, but rescheduled for today. The outcome of the scheduled hearing is unknown at this time. Opponents of the bill include American Civil Liberties Union, the League of Women Voters, NAACP and AARP, the AP reported.

Three more states have exhibited greater threats of voter ID, one of which actually enacted a voter ID bill just last week.

Although it went largely under the radar, the governor of Utah signed House Bill 126 into law last week, requiring all voters to present either one form of photographic proof of identity (unless it is a tribal ID) or two non-photo IDs proving name and address before voting in person. Earlier this year, the bill was strongly opposed by advocates because it "will disenfranchise hundreds, if not thousands of voters in Utah in order to solve [the] nonproblem," of voter fraud, according to advocates at local blog, Utah Legislature Watch.

Following in Utah's footsteps, the Oklahoma legislature approved a "preventive measure," voter ID Senate Bill 4 yesterday, despite Democratic Governor Brad Henry's "serious concerns about unintended consequences" relating to voter ID legislation, according to the Oklahoman today.

"While the voter ID concept sounds good on the surface, there are valid concerns that such requirements would keep some eligible voters at home, particularly senior citizens," said Henry's spokesperson, Paul Sund. "The right to vote is one of our country's most precious freedoms, and Governor Henry believes lawmakers must be especially careful when they attempt to tinker with this basic right."

If Henry vetoes the bill, SB 4 author Sen. Charles Ford plans to "work on another bill that would bypass the governor and send the question of voter ID to a vote of the people," the Oklahoman reported. However, "House Democratic leader Danny Morgan opposed SB 4, saying legislators' time would be better spent addressing real problems, not imaginary ones" Morgan said that even the Republican House author of the bill could not "offer a case of voter fraud. "It's funny to me that we took up this unnecessary legislation on the same day as we were supposed to finalize a budget for common education," he said.

Despite Oklahoma's intensive efforts to pass voter ID, Texas takes the cake for the dramatic measures legislators have taken to pass or fight voter ID in recent years. After a 23 hour Senate hearing in March that lead to the passage of voter ID Senate Bill 362, the House plans to hold a two-day hearing next week in an effort to "spare the House from a partisan bloodbath," according to the Austin American-Statesman.

"Rep. Todd Smith, chairman of the House Committee on Elections, wants that panel to hear invited testimony April 6, with members of the public welcome to speak April 7," according to the report.

Other "compromises" are being made in alternate drafts of the voter ID bill that "could bring members of both parties together." Rep. Joe Heflin (D-Crosbyton) hopes to present a draft that would phase in voter ID over a four-to-six year period, exempt voters over the age of 65, provide photos on voter registration cards, and ensure the state has money to pay for ID as well as support and expand voter education and registration efforts.

Last week, "he outlined some of his ideas to [Republican chairman of the House committee on Elections, Rep. Todd] Smith, who didn't reject any out of hand, though he said he wants to hear testimony about their feasibility and potential costs before making commitments."

Compromise or not, the Texas publication the Lubbock Avalanche Journal questions lawmakers' priorities in the legislature at such a critical time. "With other seemingly more pressing matters demanding lawmakers' attention, such as the state budget for the next two years and the struggling economy, photo ID is what they're focusing on?"

Opinion writer Jaime Castillo at the San Antonio Express-News wondered the same. "There isn't a district attorney in the state of Texas who says there is a crisis involving people trying to impersonate others in the voting booth," he wrote. "So, to put it into perspective, the Legislature will literally spend weeks debating a voter ID bill that solves no problem."

With one bill enacted, one bill withdrawn, and four more high profile bills pending, it is clear that lawmakers continue to focus on voter ID over other, serious election administration problems, doing nothing to make elections truly fair, honest, and accessible. As the citizens who are less likely to possess required ID tend to already be historically underrepresented in the electorate, it's time for lawmakers to stop the partisan politics and focus their attention on expanding access to the polls, not restricting it.

To monitor voter ID bills in these states, 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.

Advocates Identify Voter Registration System as Nation's Biggest Election Problem

project vote — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 21:44:34 GMT

Despite reports of voter registration barriers, voter intimidation, and non-compliance with voting rights law in recent elections, it appears that state legislatures and Congress are not actively focusing on the real issues in election administration. Considering the current economic state, almost the only attention that election reform is getting is through messy, partisan fueled debates to require photo voter ID on the state level-a fight that, just last week, quietly brought Utah to the list of eight other states that go beyond the Help America Vote Act in voter ID requirements. In recent Congressional hearings regarding voter registration and other election issues experienced in 2008, a number of groups have expressed their concerns with the current voting system and its impact on voters.
Last week, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund was one of several civil rights advocates to detail violations of federal election law and other systemic voting barriers in U.S. elections before the U.S. House Judiciary Subcommittee on Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil liberties.

"In the 2008 elections, Asian Americans faced an array of barriers that prevented them from exercising their right to vote," said AALDEF executive director Margaret Fung in a recent press release.

The group outlined incidents of "anti-Asian voter disenfranchisement from 52 cities across the country" in their report, Asian American Access to Democracy in the 2008 Elections, including language assistance barriers, "rude, hostile" poll workers, denial of provisional ballots, overzealous voter ID requests, and perhaps the biggest issue of all, mishandled or faultily processed voter registrations that ultimately lead to some voters being turned away from the polls.

"Voting rights enforcement and election reform should be top priorities for Congress and the new Administration," Fung said. Before the House subcommittee, AALDEF recommended legislation to allow for automatic voter registration or "Universal Voter Registration," a recurring theme in recent weeks as at least two major news publications called on Congress to revamp the registration system following Congressional hearings in recent weeks.

Last year, millions of people could not vote for the nation's president as a result of voter registration problems, many of which were "through no fault of their own," according to a Washington Post editorial last week. Among the voting rights victims were "a man whose name was mistakenly confused with that of an ineligible convicted felon; a woman whose registration was never turned in by a third-party registration organization; a serviceman who was moved from base to base and couldn't meet the deadline to register" and many more "never received the absentee ballots they requested."

The Post lays blame on the "antiquated way voters are registered. Congress must work with the states to fix the problems that end up disenfranchising far too many citizens."

The New York Times also pressed on Congress to "finally deliver on its promise of electoral reform" after eight years of "serious flaws" in the voting system. The Times joined the Post, AALDEF, and other groups in expressing concern over voter registration administration, which left as many as nine million eligible voter registrants off the rolls, due to "a variety of hurdles, including missed deadlines or changes in residence."

"One of the main reasons voting is in such bad shape is that the states have far too much leeway in running elections, ranging from what ID they require to the number of polling places they open and the allocation of voting machines, which has a big impact on how long the lines are on Election Day," the Times wrote. "Registering to vote and casting ballots in federal elections are federal acts, which should be governed by uniform national standards."

Both the Post and the Times go further to suggest that the "onus for registration" should be shifted from the voter to the state "to build a permanent roster" of voters, thereby streamlining the voter registration process and theoretically increasing voter participation while reducing voter disenfranchisement due to systemic issues such as missed deadlines and address changes. This can be achieved, they suggest, by identifying eligible voters through motor vehicle lists or tax records. In the past, other groups, such as FairVote have suggested that drawing from offices of vital statistics would also be a step towards automatic voter registration, and could potentially capture a larger pool of eligible voters beyond those who have the resources to obtain driver's licenses or to independently file taxes.

The need for government to take a more active role in compiling and maintaining accurate voter lists was reiterated at today's House Administration Subcommittee on Elections hearing. George Gilbert, Director of the Guilford County Board of Elections in North Carolina, put the question before the committee: "Is voting a right of citizenship? And if it is, does the government have a greater responsibility to partner with its citizens in guaranteeing that right? No matter how many barriers to registration we remove, or how we improve our registration process, we are going to continue to disenfranchise voters if citizen-initiated pre-registration is required....If the objective is to enable eligible citizens to vote...the states must assume a more active role in identifying eligible voters and enabling their right to vote."

Arturo Vargas, Executive Director of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, also testified today about the issues facing American voters, particularly Latino Americans and new citizens. His recommendations to the committee included the need for states to undertake "vigorous efforts" to provide basic information to voters, including language assistance and online resources for verifying voting status; a reexamination of the ways states process voter registrations and maintain their voter lists; stronger DOJ enforcement of federal laws (including the VRA, HAVA, and NVRA); and halting the states' "alarming proliferation" of additional proof-of-citizenship restrictions and voter-ID requirements beyond what are already called for in HAVA. "Restrictive voter ID requirements," Mr. Vargas testified, "create new obstacles for Latino participation in the electoral process...and also impose significant burdens on voters, particularly the elderly, the poor, or people living in rural areas." (Read written testimony submitted by Project Vote here, and the testimony of Mr. Vargas' and other witnesses from today's hearing here.)

Other issues discussed in today's hearing included Same-Day Registration and Election-Day Registration-which Gilbert called an "important safety net for the voters we miss in the process"-and revamping registration to accommodate the needs of America's highly mobile population. A few state lawmakers are pushing bills to revamp the voter registration system in a variety of related ways. In Connecticut, for example, a measure to permit Election Day Registration, HB 6435, was reported favorably by committee and filed with the Legislative Commissioner's Office. Same Day Registration is currently practiced by about 10 states, all of which show a voter turnout rate that is 10-12 percentage points above the national average, according to research and advocacy group, Demos. New York introduced two bills this week that would help alleviate other voter registration issues that affect highly mobile voters who are often hurt by voter registration deadlines and faulty registration processing procedures. Assembly Bill A 7011 would require Boards of Elections to transfer a voter's registration status wherever they move in within the state while Assembly Bill 6971 would help expand the likelihood of a provisional ballot being counted by allowing voters to cast such ballots within their county of residence rather than precinct. It is unclear at this time if any of these bills are viable in their respective legislatures.

While restrictive voter-ID laws are based on a fear of fraudulent voting undermining the system, there is almost no evidence to justify these concerns. The evidence provided in these Congressional hearings, on the other hand, shows that flaws in the system pose a significant threat to the participation of eligible voters. This should resonate with lawmakers on the state level who continue to focus their election reform agendas on the voter--via voter-ID-rather than on the voting system at large. While the Post reports these Congressional hearings are "just a start in laying out the issues," both Congress and the states should adhere to their responsibility to carefully facilitate and protect our rights as Americans.

To monitor voter registration, provisional voting, and related 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.

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.

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.

Voter ID still a Looming Threat for 2009

project vote — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 19:32:32 GMT

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

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

by Erin Ferns

After the U.S. Supreme Court upheld one of the country's strictest voter ID laws in April, several states rushed to pass similar bills before the year's end. By December, more than 25 states introduced legislation to require voter ID at the polls. Though none of these bills were successful this year, lawmakers in several states are hoping to revive such restrictive requirements in 2009.

Since July of this year, at least seven states have pre-filed or carried over voter ID legislation for the 2009-2010 sessions, including Nevada, Maryland, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.
Oklahoma Senator and author of Senate Bill 4, John Ford (R-Bartlesville) is confident the voter ID bill will pass in 2009, despite resistance from the legislature to pass a similar bill earlier this year. However, opponents maintain that such a measure would "suppress the vote among the elderly and among minorities," according to the Tulsa World earlier this month. Furthermore, "there's no documentation of any fraud anywhere in the voting system," said Sen. Jim Wilson (D-Tahlequah).

Last week, Maryland Senator Andrew P. Harris (R-Baltimore County) pre-filed S 43, a bill requiring all voters to provide government issued photo ID when voting at their polling place. Two days later, the Baltimore Examiner reported an effort to require the voters in Anne Arundel County to provide photo ID at the polls. It would be the only jurisdiction in the state to require photo ID.

"My goal is to improve voter confidence in the election system," said Republican Anne Arundel County delegate and voter ID supporter, Nic Kipke. "There is skepticism over the validity of elections."

Despite this assertion, Kipke also admits that there were no instances of voter fraud in the county or the state to inspire the legislation, according to the Examiner.

Voting rights advocates are opposed to such measures in Maryland because such requirements "suppress turnout by intimidating people [away from the polls]," said state ACLU legislative director, Cindy Boersma."They'll feel as if their vote is being tracked. You shouldn't be able to prevent people from voting if they are constitutionally eligible to vote."

In May of this year, voting rights advocates, including Project Vote, helped defeat a voter ID/Proof-of-Citizenship bill (HJR 48) in Missouri. Last week, however, the state appeared to be re-igniting this battle by pre-filing another constitutional amendment to require photo ID (HJR 9).

Other states, including Mississippi, have recently made headlines for similar legislative plans for the new year. Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann is reportedly proposing to "expand the powers of the secretary of state," by way of multiple election reform measures, including voter ID. In 2008, voter ID was a top election issue in the state with the introduction and failure of several voter ID bills in both the regular and special sessions. In 2009, Elections Committee Chairman Sen. Terry Burton, R-Newton, "said he would produce [voter ID measures] and other legislative measures on a piece-by-piece basis rather than inserting all Hosemann's voter legislation in a Senate omnibus bill this year," according to the Jackson Free Press.

Currently, eight states either require or request government issued photo ID. Eighteen more states exceed Help America Vote Act requirements and request both photo and non-photo ID in order for voters to cast their ballots.

Beginning next week, states will begin convening for the 2009-2010 legislative sessions. To monitor voter ID or other election reform bills in 20 states, visit www.ElectionLegislation.org (registration required). To receive a weekly update on election legislation in 50 states and related news, please email eferns@projectvote.org.

Quick Links:
www.ElectionLegislation.org
"Voter ID Requirements." Project Vote (Web page).
"Voter ID Requirements by State." Project Vote

In Other News:

N.C. voter participation swelled in 2008 - Raleigh News & Observer [N.C.]
Democracy North Carolina says 2008 was the Year of the Voter.

Voting changes proposed: Measure would allow early voting, more absentees - Associated Press
RICHMOND (AP) - Virginia voters would find it easier to avoid long lines on Election Day if legislation submitted for the 2009 General Assembly becomes law.

Lawmakers Target Individual Voters, While Failing to Address Systemic Problems

project vote — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:36:20 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's blog, Voting Matters

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

By Erin Ferns

Recent analyses of the 2008 general election find that overall participation increased on November 4, with a significant surge in voter participation among historically underrepresented Americans. Yet, while some lawmakers have been inspired by the recent voter turnout to propose election reforms that expand access to voting rights, others continue to focus on creating additional barriers to voting.
While new legislation aims to create additional hurdles to prevent one of the rarest election crimes-individual voter fraud-- some more serious election administration problems have still not been addressed a month (and, in some cases, years) after they were identified as Election Day problems, and little to no legislation to improve the way states manage voter rolls or distribute provisional ballots has been filed to date.

"I know there's a perception out there that this election proceeded more smoothly than the one four years ago," said election law expert at Ohio State University, Dan Tokaji in a recent Associated Press report. "But it's also clear from this election that we've got serious problems that remain," he said.

The inconsistency among states in interpreting federal election law is proving problematic in the administration of elections. Provisional ballots, for example, which are granted to voters who encounter "voter registration problems or because a person had signed up to vote by mail but wanted to cast their ballot at the polls," are counted differently from state to state, rendering many legitimate ballots ineligible if not cast within the correct county or even precinct.

In Colorado, a recent lawsuit to look into the questionable purging of 44,000 voters led to the investigation of whether 69 rejected provisional ballots were actually legitimate, according to Rocky Mountain News reporter, Myung Oak Kim.

"The analysis is being done as a result of a lawsuit filed last month by state and national voter-rights groups against Secretary of State Mike Coffman," Kim wrote. "The plaintiffs claimed that Coffman inappropriately removed scores of people from the voter rolls in violation of a federal law that prohibits purging of voter files within 90 days of a federal election. Coffman contends that it was legal to remove 44,000 voter files since May."

About 365 voters with canceled registrations cast provisional ballots, wrote Kim. Statewide, more than 53,000 provisional ballots were cast, about 80 percent of which were actually counted.

In 2004, acceptance rate of provisional ballots varied from 96 percent in Alaska to 6 percent in Delaware, according to a Project Vote report, Maximizing the Effectiveness of Provisional Voting.

These kinds of inconsistencies are also being challenged in Ohio for their potential to violate "citizens' equal protection and due process rights," according to the Associated Press . The report announced the court's decision to move forward with a lawsuit challenging the state's voting system after the 2004 presidential election.

"The Ohio lawsuit cites examples of voters in some counties who were misdirected by poll workers, believe their votes were miscounted or not counted at all, found broken or not enough voting machines at their polling sites, and it also alleges misuse of provisional ballots. It claims the irregularities fell disproportionately on minority voters," AP reports.

The case, filed by the League of Women Voters three years ago, cites election system issues that date back to 1971. And yet the problems persisted in 2008, according to Pete Johnson of The Free Press. According to this story, a coalition of Election Day observers from The Columbus Institute for Contemporary Journalism and the Ohio Green Party found an "outrageous" number of provisional ballots being distributed in inner city precincts due to misinterpretation of voter ID law and even data errors on voter rolls. Malfunctioning machines were also reportedly a serious voting inhibitor.

Despite state compliance issues with state and federal election law to protect and facilitate voting rights, from registration to ballot casting, several states are attempting to institutionalize barriers instead.

After instituting Same Day Registration during the early voting period this year to the dismay of state partisans, Ohio Republican lawmakers are attempting to halt the practice by passing a bill (SB 380) that would require voters to be registered 30 days before the early voting period, according to the Cincinnati Enquirer. Most states require voters to register 30 days before the actual election.

Proposals in other states to implement Same Day or Election Day Registration are being met with resistance from election officials. In West Virginia, for example, according to local newspaper, Beckley Register-Herald, "a proposal before a legislative interims panel would allow potential voters to come by Election Day, get registered and promptly mark ballots, all in one convenient trip."

But many elections clerks are against the proposal out of unsubstantiated fear of voter fraud.
"They don't realize what a monster they're trying to create," Raleigh County, W. Va. Clerk, Betty Riffe said of proposed EDR in the state. "They should, with other states trying it and all the problems they've had. I don't think it's a good idea." According to public policy group, Demos, voter fraud in EDR states is rare. Over three federal election cycles (1999-2005), "only 10 discrete incidents of voter fraud or alleged voter fraud that appeared
to have some merit [were found]. Of these, there was only one case of voter impersonation at the polls-ironically one of the most frequently claimed abuses when fraud enters the public debate."

And the 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.

The Orlando Sentinel criticizes the "movement brewing to overhaul the nation's system of elections through a series of federal mandates." The editorial not only slams the prospect of federally mandated Election Day Registration because of the "chaos" that uninformed voters would bring to the polls, but inexplicably dismisses the idea of providing high school graduates the opportunity to register to vote.

"In Florida, the deadline is about one month before the general election. It's hard to muster much sympathy for someone who doesn't start paying attention until a few weeks before Election Day."

The editorial trivializes the need for such reforms by pinning the problem on the voter who, presumably, could not take the time to register before Election Day. In reality, voters who do not have stable residences and set incomes face more hurdles when it comes to registering to vote and staying on the rolls. Young, low income, and minority voters change residences at much higher rates than the national average of 14 percent, according to recent Census Bureau data. This requires them to go through the often untimely process of re-registering whenever they change residences and the headache that may result from overzealous list maintenance procedures (as illustrated in Colorado). Election Day Registration would help ameliorate those problems.

Like the argument against EDR in West Virginia, unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud are also perpetuating the demand for voter ID by lawmakers in numerous states for the 2009 legislative sessions.

In Mississippi, secretary of state and longtime voter ID advocate, Delbert Hosemann hopes to resurrect nine failed voter ID bills from 2008 by supporting early voting as long as it involves voter identification in 2009, according to the Northeast Mississippi Daily Journal. However, House Apportionment and Elections Committee Chairman Tommy Reynolds said the two reforms are unrelated and should not be tied together.

Maryland, another state hoping to pass a voter ID law, is also making headlines.

"Republican Delegate Nic Kipke drew headlines earlier this month when he said he would propose the requirement for Anne Arundel County during the 2009 General Assembly session," according local publication, the Frederick News-Post. However, lawmakers say that the law, which is criticized for its potential to "disenfranchise poor voters because there is a fee for state-issued identification such as a driver's license" is unlikely to pass.

Finally, one state actually has a voter ID bill filed and ready to be heard in 2009. The Oklahoma bill will be carried over from the 2008 session, according to the Associated Press. "Senate Bill 4 changes the types of documents that would be required, but still requires voters to provide identification. The new measure requires a photo identification that is issued by the federal government, state government or a tribe. If one of those items is not available, the voter can show a county-issued voter ID card."

Seemingly ignoring numerous lawsuits and reports that point to systemic problems in recent elections, lawmakers continue to point the finger at individual voters-not the state election system-as the biggest threat to election integrity. Enacting laws to prevent the rare crime of voter fraud does not alleviate the real issue of long lines, misuse of provisional ballots, data errors on voter rolls, or voting machine malfunctions. Until states get the system right, and remove state-to-state inconsistencies and barriers to participation, shouldn't the real focus be on reforms that create easier access to voting such as EDR?

Quick Links:
www.ElectionLegislation.org

In Other News:

Some confusion over motor-voter - Fredericksburg Free Lance Star [Va.]
A Virginia driver's license is not a ticket to vote.

OPINION: Where Are The New Voters? Look Closer: Overall Turnout Increased, But Some Sections Of The Population Took A Giant Leap Forward - National Journal
Given voter registration spikes and widespread predictions that this year's turnout would shatter records, it's tempting to look at exit polls and ask: Where did all the voters go?

After 2008 Election, Some States Want to Make Voting Easier; Others Determined to Make it Harder

project vote — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 17:32:40 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's blog, Voting Matters

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

By Erin Ferns

Following an historic turnout in the 2008 election comes a flurry of election reform agendas from both sides of the battle over voting rights. Since November 4, some state lawmakers have seized on the success of early voting and Election Day Registration (EDR) as models for facilitating voter registration, while others appear to have been threatened by the heightened turnout and inspired to introduce restrictive voter ID and proof-of-citizenship bills for the 2009 legislative session.

Following what appears to be significant progress this year in closing participation gaps among historically underrepresented young and minority voters, we review Election Day stories in states with voter ID and EDR laws, and preview next year's legislative battle for election reform.
Election Day Registration

In North Carolina, lawmakers report being "proud" of the implementation of the state's 2007 Same Day Registration law, which permits early voters to register and vote at established "One-Stop" voting sites, according to the Raleigh News and Observer. In the 2008 primary and presidential elections, the law seemed to boost voter registration while cutting the use of provisional ballots by more than half, compared to figures from the 2004 election. On average, EDR states tend to outperform non-EDR states in election outcome by a minimum of 10 percentage points, according to public policy group, Demos.

"State Rep. Paul Luebke said he expects other states to model North Carolina's early voting system," according to the report. "The only change he would suggest for the next elections would be to standardize the hours, encouraging local boards of elections to stay open longer in early voting."

Despite the smooth success of Same Day Registration at early voting sites in North Carolina and other states,Republican lawmakers in Ohio are pushing to end the state's new mandate to allow voters to register during the early voting period.

State Republicans recently announced that they would file legislation to move the voter registration deadline to 65 days before Election Day, according to an Associated Press report. They hope to pass the bill before the 2008 session ends "and a new, Democratic-controlled House takes over in January."

However, election law expert Dan Tokaji said the bill will likely run into opposition as "federal law clearly prohibits states from having registration deadlines earlier than 30 days before an election."

Before the Nov. 4 election, the "Republican Party sued Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner to stop the same-day window...but state and federal courts upheld it."

Brunner has planned an election summit in December to review the elections process and will likely not adhere to any changes before the new legislature takes over, according to the AP report.

Meanwhile, states like West Virginia are considering implementing Election Day Registration, which currently exists in about eight other states in its traditional form whereby eligible citizens may show up at their polling place on Election Day, register to vote and cast a ballot. First implemented in Maine in 1973, EDR is also practiced in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Idaho, Iowa, Montana, New Hampshire and Wyoming. Other states, like North Carolina, Ohio and Connecticut permit variations of the option to register and vote at the same time, either during an early voting period, or-in the case of Connecticut-on a special ballot that only allows them to vote for the president.

"I lost my card, and I didn't think I could do it too close to the time," said one West Virginia voter and supporter of an EDR law, according to Parksburg, W. Va. News station, WTAP. "So, if it was that way, I could have voted."

However, Woods County clerk, Jamie Six, who "studied the idea for the state clerk's association" is against the implementation of EDR.

"The poll workers have a long and very busy day already," Six said. "And to add this to their plate to take care of on election day, we don't feel it would be fair."

While EDR in the state is unlikely, Six says it is possible to allow voters to register during the early voting period. "A committee of the West Virginia Legislature is to hear from Six on Monday," according to WTAP.

In the 2008 session, about 19 states introduced EDR legislation. Bills are pending in four states: Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Ohio. None of these bills have moved since this summer.

At least two states, Texas and Montana, which currently practices EDR, have pre-filed several bills relating to EDR for the 2009 session.

Voter ID

While some states were facilitating voter registration and voting this year, Indiana - home of the country's strictest voter ID law - reportedly turned some of its young voters away without casting a regular ballot, and even encouraged poll workers in other states to mandate voter ID when no such law existed in the first place.

Despite being properly registered and equipped with out-of-state and student ID, the young voters were only allowed to vote provisionally on Nov. 4, leaving some discouraged and others in tears, according to a letter to the Indianapolis Star by Leon Riley, an election official at Butler University's Hinkle Fieldhouse precinct.

"The Indiana voter ID law amounted to disenfranchisement for a number of young, well-informed voters, as well as some voters who have various limitations of resources, transportation and problem-solving ingenuity. Is this what we want for some of our brightest and best, or for some who need help along the way? In fairness, this unnecessary barrier must be abolished," wrote Riley.

The day before the election, an emergency motion was filed to stop enforcement of the voter ID law based on constitutional violations. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago denied the motion a week later without citing any reasons why, according to the Indiana Lawyer.

With the controversy over the U.S. Supreme Court's upholding of Indiana's voter ID law, and a flurry of voter registration fraud allegations in the weeks before the election, poll workers in some states appeared confused over their own states' laws. Voters in Mecklenburg County, Virgina, for example, complained that poll workers illegally asked them to provide proof of identification, including photo ID, according to the Smith Hill Enterprise. There were also reports of misleading signs outside of polling places that indicated photo ID was required.

The misinformation amounted to a misinterpretation of the Help America Vote Act, which required voters who registered by mail after 2003 to provide proof of ID.

"The voter being asked to present a photo ID is not the preferred language to use," said Jessica Lane of the State Board of Elections. The preferred language, she said, is to ask for "a form of ID."

Whatever the intention, voters were set back after waiting hours in long lines, leaving to get their IDs, or possibly, not return at all, according to the Enterprise.

"I am registered with neither party. I am a devout independent with libertarian leanings, but I believe in the constitution and the fact that everyone needs to get out and vote," wrote one concerned voter. "Was anyone denied the right to vote? If they did not have a photo ID and saw the sign, did they say 'Oops. I guess I can't vote' and leave?".

For voter ID advocates, preventing the extremely rare crime of individual voter fraud is worth the risk of compromising a voter's right to cast a ballot. However, preventing many eligible voters from casting a ballot just to prevent a rare crime hardly seems on par with democracy. A four year investigation by the federal government found only 24 instances of voter fraud out of more than 214 million votes cast. Several studies have found that a number of already under-represented Americans - primarily young, elderly, minority and poor - would have a difficult time meeting the requirements. These studies include a Brennan Center survey that found 21 million Americans were without the required identification; a University of Washington study that found about a quarter of Indiana's young, African-American and low income voting-age populations lack the necessary ID; and a University of Georgia study found the state's Latino and Black voters were twice as likely not to posses required ID compared to White voters.

Yet despite the lack of evidence of voter fraud, and a well known, recent history of young and elderly voters missing out on the democratic process in Indiana (including Indiana nuns and Notre Dame University students who were turned away in the 2008 primaries) lawmakers in states like Oklahoma and Texas are hoping to make voter ID a reality in 2009.

While acknowledging that Oklahoma Speaker of the House Chris Benge "and the others pushing for a voter ID system have a certain level of common sense on their side (one idea is to offer free ID with their plan), Wayne Greene of the Tulsa World dismisses the argument that if people are required to show photo ID to cash a check, they should be required to show ID when they vote. Greene points out that there is plenty of evidence of people attempting to cash fraudulent checks, but no evidence of people attempting to cast fraudulent votes in Oklahoma.

"Benge told me he didn't have any examples of fraudulent voting to justify what sounds like a pretty expensive free ID system," Greene says. The state, which introduced and failed seven voter ID bills this year, will convene for the 2009-2010 session next February.

Immediately after Election Day, lawmakers in Texas - where there was a serious voter ID battle during the 2007 session - pre-filed a few bills requiring voter ID as well as proof-of-citizenship at registration.
Supporters of voter ID hope to have it in effect by the next gubernatorial election, according to local publication, Athens Daily Review.

In total this year, 25 states introduced voter ID bills, and bills are still pending in four states: Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.

Track these and other election-related bills by visiting www.ElectionLegislation.org.

After this presidential election's phenomenal turnout that showed the American electorate is finally closer to representing all of its citizens, lawmakers should recognize that voters take this fundamental right seriously. The passage of laws that help facilitate that right are far more conducive to a fair and healthy democracy than the passage of those that prevent some citizens from voting at all.

Quick Links:
www.ElectionLegislation.org

In Other News:

More minorities voted this year, but white turnout dropped - McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON - Barack Obama's 8.5 million-vote margin over John McCain was fueled by a more than 20 percent surge in minority voting, a new analysis of exit polling data suggests.

Minnesota group asks feds to investigate problems with state's voter rolls - Associated Press
ST. PAUL (AP) - A group opposed to Minnesota's same-day voter registration law has asked the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate problems it suspects with the state's voter rolls.

Woman seeks limits on mentally disabled voters - Associated Press
GRINNELL - A Deep River woman wants to change a[n Iowa] state law to require that mentally disabled voters be supervised when they cast a ballot.

Erin Ferns is a Research and Policy Analyst with Project Vote's Strategic Writing and Research Department (SWORD

Wired Magazine: "Voter Database Glitches Could Disenfranchise Thousands"

project vote — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 20:05:06 GMT

Cross-posted to Project Vote's blog Voting Matters.

By Nathan Henderson-James

Today Wired Magazine published an in-depth look at potential Election Day problems associated with voter registration data matching, list maintenance, provisional ballots, and shadowy interstate compacts through which member states cross-check their voter registration lists and purge supposedly duplicated voters. Titled "Voter Database Glitches Could Disenfranchise Thousands", the piece, written by Kim Zetter, starts this way,

Electronic voting machines have been the focus of much controversy the last few years. But another election technology has received little scrutiny yet could create numerous problems and disenfranchise thousands of voters in November, election experts say.

This year marks the first time that new, statewide, centralized voter-registration databases will be used in a federal election in a number of states.

The article presents an in-depth discussion of the potential problems associated with the creation of the centralized databases and their potential to disenfranchise thousands of newly and currently registered voters in state after state.

But election experts say the real concern is how states are conducting database matches of new voters under HAVA.

The law requires each voter to have a unique identifier. Since 2004, new registration applicants have had to provide a driver's license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number to register (voters who don't have them are assigned a unique number by the state). States are required to try to authenticate the numbers with motor vehicle records and the Social Security Administration database.

But databases are prone to errors such as misspellings and transposed numbers, and applicants are prone to make mistakes or write illegibly on applications. The Social Security Administration has acknowledged that matches between its database and voter-registration records have yielded a 28.5 percent error rate.

Disturbingly, despite these kinds of error rates, several states have joined secretive interstate compacts that allow them to share their registration databases with each other and purge voters who supposedly show up on more than one list.

[Project Vote Executive Director Michael] Slater cites another troubling trend emerging with the implementation of statewide databases.

Several states have begun comparing databases for duplicate records of existing voters, then purging voters they believe have moved and registered in another state. The problem, Slater says, is the methods used can yield false positives, and officials are deleting voters without contacting them to verify that they've moved, or waiting for two federal election cycles to pass, which are requirements under the National Voter Rights Acts of 1993.

In 2006, Kentucky's attorney general successfully sued his state's board of elections after officials compared their list to ones from South Carolina and Tennessee and purged about 8,000 voters who appeared to have registered in those states at a later date than their registration in Kentucky and were presumed to have moved.

Project Vote is investigating Kansas, Louisiana and South Dakota for similar activity. Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri and Nebraska have also been comparing lists.

"That is a trend that will accelerate, but there are inadequate safeguards, and I think it's very, very dangerous," Slater says.

For more information, Project Vote has created materials on database matching, maintaining voting rolls, provisional ballots, and voter ID requirements.

How Voter ID Laws Unfairly Burden Voters And Skew The Electorate

project vote — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 19:07:20 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

By Erin Ferns

With little more than two months left before Election Day, prospective voters are rushing to get registered. And like the way that slugs thrive in moist weather, voter suppression attacks spring up around large-scale voter registration drives. Partisan attempts to shape the electorate, in effect choosing the voters rather than voters choosing their own representatives, seek to impose barriers to voter participation by eligible citizens rather than creating a system that works to facilitate the foundational right of American democracy. Voter ID laws are a particularly favorite weapon in the arsenal of partisans seeking to choose their own voters to the exclusion of other eligible citizens. More than 25 states introduced voter ID bills this year and at least nine have such laws in place for this November's election despite scant evidence of voter impersonation, the ill it is supposed to stop.
The reality of the kind of detrimental election reforms typified by Voter ID laws is that they place the burden for ensuring free and fair elections squarely upon the voter, rather than upon the government, despite the fact that the government controls every aspect of the electoral process, from voter registration to counting the ballots. In effect, these laws concentrate on the possible wrong-doing of individual voters to the exclusion of the myriad barriers that prevent significant numbers of voters from underrepresented population groups from participation in the electoral process, thus helping to skew the electorate toward being older, whiter, and more affluent than America's citizenry as a whole. Laws that concentrate on the voter rather than the system almost without exception narrow the ability of voters to exercise their democratic right to vote, which falls especially hard upon already disadvantaged Americans, as illustrated by a concerned Arizona citizen in a local publication as well as a Wisconsin editorial this week.

"I believe people heard that no one should vote who is not a citizens," said Kathryn Kozak, referring to Arizona's voter ID requirement that exceeds federal mandates in a letter to the Arizona Daily Sun on Sunday. "They didn't necessarily think about what this would mean for those people who were citizens."

Kozak was shocked to learn that her sample ballot would no longer suffice as proof of identity when casting a ballot in the state's Sept. 2 primary election. Like more than 21 million Americans, she does not have valid proof of identity: "My problem is that I use my middle name on my driver's license, but my legal name includes my first name. The election office says I should still be able to vote, but you never know what is going to happen at the polls.

"This voter ID law is making it difficult for me and others in my situation to vote," she wrote.

As Kozak pointed out, many voters believe voter ID laws are a valid way of preventing illegal voting and have not considered the impact of such "preventive" measures on eligible citizens. Unsympathetic to her challenge of the state's law that exceeds federal mandate, a few readers of her story in the Arizona Daily Sun commented that anyone who wants to vote would go through the trouble of obtaining valid ID. However, cost, time and high mobility rates make obtaining valid ID a troublesome feat for millions of Americans who already face obstacles to participation in the electoral process.

Frankly, it is not as if the United States has enviable voter participation rates. In our 2007 report, Representational Bias in the 2006 Electorate, a majority (52%) of eligible Americans did not vote. Overrepresented in this segment of the electorate were young people, minorities and low income Americans - all highly mobile communities who are profoundly affected by voter ID requirements. And while people point to the convenient excuse of "voter apathy" to explain non-participation, the reality is that our study showed that Americans, once registered, turn out at a rate of a 71 percent.

That type of turnout would be reduced in states that impose voter ID requirements since more than 21 million U.S. citizens do not have current, valid photographic proof of ID, according to a poll by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. "Valid" ID in most cases must reflect the current address as listed in the voter's registration records. In 2006, more than four in 10 Americans reported having lived at their current address for less than five years.

Furthermore, a 2006 study commissioned by the Election Assistance Commission found a 2.9% decrease in turnout overall in states that require photo ID and a 2.7% decrease in states that required documentary ID compared to states that require voters to give their names, according to a 2007 Project Vote report.

Ultimately, voter ID laws inhibit voters who already face barriers such as high mobility rates that require them to update voter registration and identification information. In order to help facilitate the voting rights of these voters and maintain the integrity of elections by prohibiting illegal voting, the responsibility needs to not only be put on the voter who must show up and vote, but also on the design of the election system as a whole.

The Wisconsin publication, La Crosse Tribune makes just this point in a recent editorial cautioning against the adoption of voter ID laws in the wake of stories about voter registration workers getting caught defrauding their employer and the state by attempting to get paid for submitting false voter registration forms. Indeed, the editors applauded the state's new voter registration system, touting it as a more efficient method of keeping ineligible voters off the rolls.

"While some people argue that the case underscores the need for a photo ID requirement before one is allowed to vote, that would be an over-reaction that could end up disenfranchising older and low-income voters who lack such identification."

The editorial continues: "It would make more sense to use the new federally mandated voter registration systems [Help America Vote Act-required voter list maintenance procedures is what they mean. ~~ed] to screen for nonqualified voters~~ rather than risk disenfranchising large numbers of people with a photo ID program."

In a democracy with more than 200 million eligible citizens, the burden of ensuring free and fair elections cannot be born solely by the individual voter. The government, which controls all aspects of elections and therefore the means by which Americans exercise their foundational democratic right, must also work to create an electoral system that lowers barriers to participation and ensures the efficient implementation of procedures that allow all eligible citizens to register, cast a ballot, and have that ballot counted.

Quick Links:
Reports
"Maintaining Current and Accurate Voter Lists." Project Vote. Dec. 2006.
"Restrictive Voter Identification Requirements." Project Vote. Mar. 2007.
Web Page
2008 Voter ID Bills. ElectionLegislation.org.

In Other News:

Voting campaign helps Homestead seniors register - Miami Herald
As Rennatta Delgado, manager of Homeowner Services for Centro Campesino Farmworker Center in Florida City says, ``although seniors are often a forgotten community, when it comes to the 2008 elections, their important voices will be heard at the polls.''

Groups to register homeless to vote - Montgomery Advertiser (Ala.)
John Cook Thomas would like to cast his vote in the November election for Barack Obama.

Voter Registration Key to Obama's Efforts to Put Virginia in Play - Washington Post
RICHMOND -- Virginia has added nearly a quarter-million registered voters since the 2004 elections, and about half of that growth came from increasingly Democratic Northern Virginia.

Erin Ferns is a Research and Policy Analyst with Project Vote's Strategic Writing and Research Department (SWORD).

Voter Registration Drive Fuels Voter Suppression Attempts in Wisconsin

project vote — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 22:55:50 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's blog Voting Matters

By Nathan Henderson-James

Just yesterday we noted the right way to report on charges of voter fraud and the wrong way to go about it. We explained how the news media had been gamed by people with a partisan interest in the outcome of elections to gin up hysteria to engage in voter intimidation and voter disenfranchisement efforts.

Well, the partisans are back at it in Wisconsin, but this time the press is following the lead of Virginia journalists and scrutinizing the claims rather than simply reprinting the press release.

Here's the backstory. The community organization ACORN has recently completed a voter registration drive in Milwaukee aimed at historically disenfranchised populations like low-income folks and African-Americans. The drive assisted voters complete some 35,000 cards. So far so good.
However, some of ACORN's canvassers were caught forging cards in order to get paid for not doing the work. Under Wisconsin law all cards filled out, completely or incompletely, fraudulently or not, are required to be turned in. Out of the 35,000 cards, ACORN and Board of Elections officials estimate that about 1500-2000 of them had problems. The bulk of those were simple incompletes, but about 200 or so were clearly attempts by canvassers to defraud both ACORN and the state of Wisconsin by submitting false cards.

The traditional media has actually done a fairly good job reporting the story, going into great detail on how the cards were caught, the quality control procedures used by ACORN, and the context of the numbers involved versus the total number of cards submitted. This reportage has been ably supplemented by bloggers like Cory Liebmann at One Wisconsin Now and Capper at Cognitive Dissonance.

But, of course, this situation has served as an opportunity for conservative partisans to immediately pick up their calls for voter disenfranchisement policies such as voter ID. Such a policy would ironically, or perhaps not so ironically, actually push down the voter participation rates among those folks who most rely on voter registration drives to bring them into the civic participation process.

Here's choice quote from Pete DiGaudio who writes as The Texas Hold 'Em Blogger,

"Well, yes, I actually do support voter suppression. I am in favor of suppressing the vote of dead people, nonexistent people, convicted felons, illegal aliens, people voting more than once, et al. Every time one of these people votes, it cancels out my legitimate vote.
A simple thing like photo ID for voting would eliminate these fraudulent voters when they showed up at the polls."

Project Vote's report The Politics of Voter Fraud (PDF) has consistently pointed out that there simply isn't widespread voter fraud in the United States and any fraudulent voting has never been tied to voter registration fraud, which is what has partisans so breathless and hyperbolic.

But the rush to point to a solution like voter ID seems not to be bothered by facts. Like the fact that the so-called fraud every partisan points to is always centered on voter registration cards. Well, voter ID isn't going to stop canvassers from wanting to get paid for not doing the work and it isn't going to stop states like Wisconsin from requiring that every card be turned in regardless of its accuracy, completeness, or legitimacy and it's definitely not going to help elections officials catch bad cards.

The truth is that the laws as written and enforced catch such problems. The mere fact of this story in the media means the system in Milwaukee works the way it is supposed to, catching problem cards. Voter ID, on the other hand stops something called "voter impersonation", which just doesn't happen in the Untied States. Of the 24 convictions won by the US Department of Justice between 2002 and 2005 for voter fraud, most of them were for problems with submitting false or illegal absentee ballots. Voter ID laws do nothing to fix this problem. But what they are great at is stopping otherwise eligible voters from casting ballots.

And that's how it works - raise loud cries of outrage over an illegal act that was caught using the safeguards that were put in place for just that situation, raise questions about the integrity of the entire elections system, and offer a solution that would not stop the identified problem and would, in fact, stop significant numbers of specific groups, generally groups who are already the most disenfranchised, from participating in elections.

Stopping Voter Suppression: The Press Gets It Right in Virginia

project vote — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 19:39:24 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's blog, Voting Matters

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

By Erin Ferns and Nathan Henderson-James

We spend a lot of time in these news updates showing how charges of voter fraud are used to discredit voter participation efforts and prime the pump for voter suppression efforts, such as the passage of voter ID bills, pushing for proof of citizenship, engaging in draconian voter purge efforts, and imposing sever restrictions on voter registration drives. We have also spent a lot of time carefully delineating the politics behind these efforts, starting with our March 2007 report The Politics Of Voter Fraud and continuing on in these diaries to name but two venues.
What is striking about how the process of disenfranchisement and voter suppression works is how much it relies upon the media to repeat and amplify the breathless and hyperbolic accusations of so-called voter fraud against voter registration drives. If journalists were to spend any time at all investigating the sensational claims - often made by people with a direct partisan interest in the outcome of an election - they would find that the accusations are mostly taken out of context, are limited to a few instances, and have never, ever, been proven to have resulted in any fraudulent vote being cast.

Sadly, the history of this issue shows that it has been bereft of this kind of basic journalism, even through the 2006 mid-term elections. This is important because haphazard reporting of partisan claims of voter fraud without checking the facts is how the media helps these voter suppression efforts. These stories not only deter potential voters from getting on the rolls, but, as noted above, inspire bad election reforms aimed at disenfranchising voters, particularly those that are currently underrepresented in the electorate.

A prime example of this kind of lazy journalism in recent weeks comes from Las Vegas where local reporters simply repeated accusations of fraud made by the Clark County clerk against ACORN without even bothering to contact ACORN to see how their drive was being managed.

The group's registration drive has reached one million voters nationwide [Full disclosure - it is run under a Joint Effort Agreement with Project Vote. ~~ed.] and, according to one article, election officials see "rampant fraud" in the 2,000~~ 3,000 cards submitted by the group each week in Las Vegas. This week, the Associated Press reported that the state set up a "voter fraud task force" to look for "election irregularities and instances of questionable voter registration and intimidation," directly citing issues with voter registration drives. Neither of these Nevada reports provided the facts of voter fraud, what it is and how it relates to the voter registration process. Most importantly, neither reports cite real examples of the intentional casting of an illegal ballot - the real definition of voter fraud - in the state.

However, it may be that the hard work Project Vote and others - including the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, DEMOS, and the Advancement Project - have engaged in over the past few years debunking the voter fraud myth is beginning to change the way journalists approach these stories.

This week, several publications broke this trend by debunking recent Virginia GOP allegations of widespread voter fraud as a result of massive voter registration drives that primarily target youth, low income and minority communities - constituencies that have a long history of being underrepresented on the voting rolls and in the voting booth.

Since the beginning of the year, an unprecedented 147,000 people - "almost half under the age of 25" - registered to vote in Virginia, according to Monday's Washington Post lead editorial. Pointing to a recent incident where three members of the Community Voters Project were arrested for falsifying voter registration cards, Republican Party chairman, Del. Jeffrey Frederick of Prince William County claims widespread voter fraud is a hidden agenda in voter registration drives. [CORRECTION: The original Washington Post editorial identified the wrong organization. The Community Voting Project is a project of the Center for Community Change. It is not affiliated with the Community Voters Project and was not involved in this incident].

Remarkably, however, this time the press decided to investigate this inflammatory accusation. This charge is "utterly baseless" and is "unsupported by election officials, police or prosecutors," the Post notes in the editorial. In fact, the Post described the accusation as an exercise in "fear mongering" by Frederick, amplified by his allegations that citizens who register with these drives are also vulnerable to identity theft, a claim that amounts to nothing more than "a classic attempt to suppress votes," the Post editorialized.

Bob Bauer, at his Web site, www.MoreSoftMoneyHardLaw.com, takes the critique one step further, looking at both the accusations and the Post's coverage. "And the Post omits mention of another feature of Fredericks' suppression gambit," wrote the election law attorney. "He also called for an 'investigation,' well understanding that his words would creep into the press on his remarks and filter out into the electorate."

In a prime example of the kind of journalism that should happen as a matter of course when these kinds of serious allegations are made, a Virginia reporter for the Danville Register & Bee reached out to local registrars to get a real idea of the voter registration process and how unlikely it is to lead to voter fraud.

"'It's not easy to falsely register somebody,' said Pittsylvania County Registrar Jenny Saunders, who explained that in addition to the registrar going over the application for obvious errors (like missed questions), there's a statewide database all applications are checked against."

Partisans out for political gain perpetuate fear about the integrity of the election system, something that the media often picks up unfiltered. "In fact," the Post wrote, "it is groundless accusations and cynical fear-mongering such as Mr. Frederick's that are injecting the real venom, and the true threat, into the elections.

Below are some important facts to consider when writing (or reading) reports on voter registration fraud:

Voter Registration Drives Rev up in Presidential Election Years
The fact that young people and minorities are expanding the voting rolls this year does not indicate that something is awry with voter registration drives. Indeed, most large-scale drives target those populations least represented in the electorate. Further, in high interest election years, especially presidential, more people are motivated to help register voters or get registered themselves. Stories about so-called voter fraud should be evaluated in terms of the number of cards thought to be fraudulent versus the total number of cards the registration drive is gathering.
Voter Registration Fraud Does Not Lead to Voter Fraud
"We have the checks and balances...to makes sure the wrong person doesn't get registered and the right person does," said Va. election official, Saunders in the Register & Bee.
Further, professionally-run drives expect almost a third of all applications to be duplicates or incomplete, no matter how well-trained the canvasser or volunteers are. This does not mean they are all illegal. However, the registrar is required to ensure all applications contain accurate information "including whether the applicant is a citizen, their Social Security number, date of birth, full name, valid residence, whether they've been convicted of a felony, or whether they have been determined mentally incapable...If any of that is left off...the application is denied," according to the Register & Bee. Note: Not all states require Social Security number information to be filled out on a voter registration card. For more information on your state's requirements on registering to vote, visit ProjectVote.org.
Allegations of Voter Fraud are Often Motivated By Partisan Gain
"If you're not winning at the ballot box, try your chances in the registrar's office, or in court," the Virginia Pilot editorialized. "[That's] [h]ardly democratic."
Following the success of voter registration drives that have increased registration among low income, minority and young people, almost all claims of rampant voter fraud have come from Republican leaders, despite lack of substantiation of a real problem. The most vicious and corrupt efforts made were part of what has become the US AttorneyGate scandal that subsequently exposed the widespread politicization of the Department of Justice and led to the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez. All of that unraveled because former US Attorney David Iglesias refused to make false accusations of voter fraud against ACORN's 2004 voter registration drive in New Mexico.
The fact is between 2002 and 2005 - when the Department of Justice carried out the most intensive investigation of voter fraud in US history - only 24 people were convicted of illegal voting nationwide. However, partisans still made public allegations and the press, in many instances, ran these claims with out real evidence. Armed with these published anecdotes and buoyed by manufactured public outcry about the possibility of their votes being canceled out by illegal voters, legislators fought to pass laws that disenfranchise certain classes of voters. As a result, states like Indiana and Georgia have implemented some of the most draconian voter ID laws despite the lack of any evidence of actual voter fraud.

Reporters practicing ethical and rigorous journalism should recognize that merely using the "rhetorical hand grenade" of voter fraud - without an explanation of how voter registration and elections are administered or an investigation into the evidence of voter fraud - is the real threat to democracy.

Quick Links:
Minnite, Lorraine. "The Politics of Voter Fraud. "Project Vote. March 2007.
Voter Registration Guides and Surveys [By State]. Project Vote

In Other News:

A voting penalty after the penalty - Birmingham Press-RegisterAnnette McWashington Pruitt watched her 18-year-old son graduate from high school this May. She proudly tells people that he is going into the Navy, following in the footsteps of his older brother (who is serving in Iraq) and his grandfather (who was in the Air Force).

Voting Rules Create Land of Disenchantment: Advocacy groups are battling New Mexico's strict voter registration laws as election looms - Miller-McCune
Jo Ann Gutierrez-Bejar remembers volunteering for the annual voter registration drive in Albuquerque, N.M. She remembers the camaraderie as the group of usually 30 to 40 volunteers headed out in the morning, clipboards in hand, to knock on doors and register new voters.

Denogean: 97-year-old voter can't prove she's a citizen: On deathbed, father told her to vote Democratic - The Tucson Press
Shirley Freeda Preiss of Surprise is one ticked-off little old lady. And who can blame her? The 97-year-old retired schoolteacher and onetime traveling showgirl has voted in every presidential election since 1932 when she cast a ballot for Franklin Delano Roosevelt. But thanks to the state's voter identification requirements, it's looking unlikely that she'll be able to vote in the upcoming presidential election.

Watch your (official) language - Stateline.org
Missouri, a key presidential swing state and home to one of the most hotly contested gubernatorial races, will test what some see as voters' attitudes toward immigrants this November with a ballot measure to make English the only language of state government.