Open Left - voter registration

Bipartisan Support for Bringing Voter Registration to the 21st Century Underway

project vote — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 22:10:50 GMT

Not too long ago, the means of accessing and staying on the voter registration rolls was a highly controversial issue that often got lost in a partisan shuffle. However, after more than two million voters were unable to vote due to problems with their voter registration last year, policymakers and advocates on both sides are finally listening. Whether it is extravagant efforts to automate voter registration on the national level or revamping state voting systems to utilize citizens' access to the Internet, improving voter registration is a glimmering goal in 2009 that brings promise for restoring the democratic process in the years to come.
"We have a voter registration system that doesn't really do what it ought to do," said former general counsel for Republican John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign, Trevor Potter, in a National Public Radio report last week. "If we have a law that says you have to be registered in order to vote, then why wouldn't the government do something to put you on the list if you're entitled to be there, and to make sure the list is accurate?" Potter says.

"For now, there's a lot of bipartisan support to do something," NPR's Pam Fessler reports. "Democrats think a more automatic system would make it easier to get people registered. And Republicans think it would reduce the potential for fraud."

Potter, along with Senator John Kerry's general counsel for his 2004 presidential campaign, Marc Elias, and "a number of election officials, experts and interest groups" have assembled the Committee to Modernize Voter Registration, an effort to "upgrade our system and bring voter registration into the 21st century," according to the group's Web site.

The group advocates for automatically enrolling and maintaining current information of eligible voters through government databases. However, despite these preliminary efforts to "inform and discuss" modernizing voter registration, some say it could take years to realize.

"How do we make sure the system is secured and that people can feel confident that their information won't be in some way lost, stolen or otherwise used?" Thad Hall, an election technology expert with the University of Utah, told NPR.

In the meantime, other voter registration improvement efforts are underway on the federal and state levels. Providing for same-day voter registration in Federal elections, companion bills, HR 3957 and S 1986 were introduced in the House and Senate in late October. Both bills are sponsored by legislators from states that have experienced decades of above-average voter registration and turnout, Minnesota and Wisconsin.

"Minnesota routinely leads the nation in voter turnout - usually over 70 percent. ..." said House bill sponsor, Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), according to the Minnesota Independent. "Enacting a National Election Day Registration law would do for the nation what same day registration has done for our State - give a voice to all who want to vote."

In support of a similar measure considered in the District of Columbia last week, Senate bill sponsor, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI)blogged about the benefits of Same Day Registration that go beyond getting voters on the rolls - it also helps legitimate voters get counted.

"In addition to increasing voter participation, SDR reduces provisional ballots. When voters who believe they are registered show up at the polls only to find out they are not listed on the voter rolls, they are usually provided a provisional ballot. Provisional ballots are rejected and discarded if it turns out the voter was not properly registered. SDR will allow voters to register on the spot, if they are qualified to vote."

Feingold's bill is currently in the Senate Rules and Administration Committee.

On the state level, voter registration overhaul appears to be gaining some headway. Ohio House Bill 260 was heard Tuesday with a number of updates to benefit Ohioans. The bill would not only follow recent state legislative trends to provide online voter registration, but also allow voters to "be automatically given the opportunity to register when they deal with agencies such as the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services," according to the Associated Press. "Ohioans are already given the opportunity to register when they get a driver's license."

Whether through "modernization," same-day-registration, or simply providing more voter registration opportunities for voters, bringing America's voter registration system to the 21st century - that is, making it accessible to all voters - is key in strengthening democracy.

What "Liberal" Media? Study Shows Manipulation of Press to Serve Right-Wing Agenda

project vote — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross-posted to Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

Media manipulation by the right-wing to influence public perception has been a decade-long tactic to undermine voter registration in America. While the current media frenzy surrounding the community organization ACORN is only partly related to voter registration efforts, it is important to note that the attacks have been built on a foundation of misinformation and media manipulation by the right-wing over several years, largely surrounding the myth of "voter fraud."
How this strategy has played out was the subject of a recent independent academic study, "Manipulating the Public Agenda: Why Acorn was the News, and What the News Got Wrong." Conducted by Peter Dreier, director of the Urban and Environmental Policy Center at Occidental College and Christopher Martin, professor of journalism at the University of Northern Iowa, the report examines how "the little-known community organization became the subject of a major news story in the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign, to the point where 82% of the respondents in an October 2008 national survey reported they had heard about ACORN."

In a press release, the authors say that "...repetition of unverified allegations and distortions was the rule in national reporting of a purported 'voter fraud' scandal involving the community organizing group ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) during the 2008 presidential campaign."

According to the study, 647 ACORN-related news stories published in 15 news outlets between 2007 and 2008, many of which parroted a plethora of unverified allegations from conservative parties.

"The academic study found that news-media coverage of the voter-fraud charges failed to distinguish between problems with registering voters and actual voting irregularities, which are rare," wrote Chronicle of Philanthropy writer Suzanne Perry, who recently covered "Manipulating the Public Agenda."

"It also found that 80 percent of the stories failed to mention that Acorn was reporting registration irregularities to the authorities; 85 percent failed to report that the group was acting to stop incidents of registration problems; and 96 percent failed to provide deeper context, especially about efforts by Republican Party officials to use voter-fraud allegations to dampen voting by low-income and minority Americans."

A prime example of conservative framing coloring the news, the study notes, is the widely reported August 2009 release of White House and Republican National Committee transcripts and emails. All major news outlet reports on the transcripts - which revealed that former Bush senior advisor, Karl Rove, helped orchestrate the firing of former New Mexico U.S Attorney David Iglesias "for failing to help Republican election prospects by prosecuting alleged instances of voter fraud by ACORN" - failed to discuss Rove's overt plan to attack ACORN's voter registration efforts in New Mexico and other states.

According to the study, this "demonstrates that there are indeed intensive political efforts to influence the national news agenda and to frame news stories by special interest groups."

In the study, Dreier and Martin note that, while the current frenzy is about ACORN, the pattern of manipulation has important ramifications for organizations across the country. "Although the 2008 presidential election is long over, conservative opinion entrepreneurs and the conservative media echo chamber remain fixated on ACORN,and poised to inject their frame about ACORN as an issue in the 2010 and 2012 national elections."

"Were this simply an isolated example of media complicity (witting or unwitting) with political organizations, the attack on ACORN would be of interest only to ACORN, its allies and detractors. But this case has wider implications. Our analysis of the narrative framing of the ACORN stories demonstrates that-despite long-standing charges from conservatives that the news media are determinedly liberal and ignore conservative ideas-the news media agenda is easily permeated by a persistent media campaign, even when there is little or no truth to the story."

In an Oct. 21 feature, the San Francisco Bay Guardian outlined the conservative agenda of using the mainstream media and playing on the public's psyche to promote the Party and its special interests. Bryant Welch, a clinical psychologist, author, and expert on political manipulation, tells the Guardian that "the right-wing commentators' success lies partly in their ability to harness core human emotions such as paranoia or envy."

"This is very, very sophisticated propaganda," says Welch. "I don't think progressives really get it that it's a technique being used all the time."

Republicans approach issues as a marketing challenge, according to George Lakoff, a professor of linguistics at UC Berkeley and author of Don't Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. In the Guardian, Lakoff says that to "counter this tactic...the left would do well to learn how to frame things in moral terms instead of playing defense against right-wing spin masters."

According to the Guardian, Lakoff's advice is to "define the moral imperative behind empowering the people and their government to create a better world, then aggressively push a campaign to do so."

"It's the 'this is the right thing to do' approach," he says.

Gov. Schwarzenegger Approves Engaging Young California Voters Early

project vote — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 04:00:00 GMT

The future of voter registration and civic engagement may just stand a chance. California (a populous state of many voters-to-be) will soon allow all 17-year-old citizens to preregister to vote so that they will be automatically enrolled as legal voters once they turn 18. This newer trend in legislation, which boasts bipartisan support, has recently passed in North Carolina and has been successfully implemented in five other states, including Florida.

"AB 30 will benefit the Golden State by encouraging higher voter registration and turnout among California's youth, and by encouraging high schools to become more actively involved in youth engagement and civic education," the New America Foundation - a group that was actively pursuing preregistration in the state - wrote in a press release Monday. "Research shows that people who get involved in the electoral process at an earlier age are much more likely to become lifelong voters. Research also shows that preregistration in Florida has boosted voter registration and voter turnout of young people."

The measure was supported by a wide range of groups, including New America, FairVote, California Association of Student Councils, and California AARP.

"This legislation had multi-generational support," said Pete Martineau, Legislative Advocate for AARP, in the release. "We want to thank the Governor for increasing the opportunities to help us register more of our children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren to vote. Civic participation is essential for a healthy democracy, and we applaud the Governor for signing AB 30."

Currently, California joins three other states that allow all 17-year-old citizens to preregister to vote. Previously, California allowed only certain 17-year-old citizens that would be 18 by the next election to preregister, a practice followed by as many as 19 other states. The confusing and unspecified age-range hampered proper implementation of the law, hardly maximizing on the potential for engaging new voters.

Three other states permit citizens as young as 16 to preregister, including Florida, Hawaii, and North Carolina, where the newly passed law will become effective in January 2010.

Perhaps inspired by the growing success of passing and implementing preregistration, other parts of the country are pushing similar bills.

"A member of the Massachusetts statehouse leadership announced last week that a similar measure is her top priority in coming weeks," according to FairVote, which referred to House Bill 683 Monday. "And the Washington, D.C. City Council last week unanimously backed pre-registration legislation."

HB 683 is eligible for executive session in the Joint Committee on Election Laws while Washington's omnibus measure, B 345 was read on the council floor for the first time last week. To follow preregistration bills and other election reforms, visit www.ElectionLegislation.org.

How to Make Voter Registration Accessible to All Citizens

project vote — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

After the 2008 election, voter registration has become a focal point for legislators and advocates from all ends of the spectrum. Whichever way it is sliced, the number of registered eligible voters has still declined since 2004. As multiple problems have been cited as the cause for lowered registration rates (including mobility issues, unequal access to registration opportunities, voter caging, and even so-called apathy), voting rights advocates as well as legislators have been vocal about their solutions.

In 1993, Congress attempted to increase voter participation by expanding access to voter registration with the enactment of the National Voter Registration Act. Congress' goals have been partially realized with the Act's best known "motor voter" provision, which has brought a significant number of voter registration applications and updates from citizens who visit motor vehicles offices.

One way the "motor voter" program could be improved, suggests Ventura County Star editor and columnist Tim Herdt, is by expanding the age groups that can take advantage of the convenience. Herdt writes about pending California Assembly Bill 30, which would amend state election law to allow all 17-year-old citizens to pre-register to vote. Pointing out that more Californian's registered to vote through the DMV than by dropping off applications at the county elections offices around the state, Herdt says lowering the voter registration age would only maximize the motor voter aspect of the NVRA.

"Now, think about what age most people receive their first driver's license. It's either 16 or 17, which is too young to vote," he wrote. "There are many reasons why potential voters from 18 to 24 are the least likely to be registered of any age group, but right up there has got to be the fact that at the time it is most convenient for them to register, they are slightly too young to take advantage of it."

Partisanship has been a battle with passing such legislation. However, a handful of states - both red and blue - have adopted preregistration policies. Herdt quotes AB 30 supporter and deputy director of the New America Foundation Political Reform Program, Blair Bobier: "As you look at other states, this has been a thoroughly nonpartisan or bipartisan issue," including Florida, where Republican Gov. Charlie Crist has been a supporter of preregistration.

The preregistration bill is currently on Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's desk.

While the motor voter program has largely been a success, enforcement of other, integral parts of the NVRA have been spotty, particularly in those that target historically underrepresented low income citizens. Voter registration applications through public assistance agencies, for example-a requirement for most states under the NVRA-have declined by 79 percent since the law was first implemented in 1995. Project Vote's Public Agency Registration Project - a joint effort with national voting rights and election reform policy group, Demos - has proven that bringing states into compliance with the law is an effective means of increasing participation. The groups' efforts have helped see states like Missouri go from collecting a dismal 8,000 applications a year to collecting more than 100,000 applications in just eight months, and all it took was following the law.

The recurring theme in overhauling the voter registration system is improving access to underrepresented groups, which can be facilitated by implementing or improving existing law. In a recent blog entry, Demos' Tova Andrea Wang addresses voter registration access for new citizens, citing upcoming elections in New Jersey and Virginia - where 40 percent of Latino citizens remain unregistered - as catalysts for rethinking the voter registration process. Wang suggests that the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, the federal agency responsible for implementing the naturalization process, should be designated as a voter registration agency under the NVRA.

"The government should start to share the burden of ensuring new Americans are registered to vote by having the federal agency responsible for immigrant services agency routinely provide voter registration materials and information to every new citizen upon naturalization," Wang wrote.

"And it's not that new Americans don't want to participate--once they are registered, immigrants vote overwhelmingly. In fact, new citizens who are registered to vote have higher rates of voter turnout than natives who are registered to vote. They just aren't given the tools to take the steps to get registered in the first place."

CA Measure to Improve Youth Voter Engagement Goes to Governor

project vote — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross-posted to Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

The California Legislature approved a bill last week to extend voter registration privileges to 17-year-old citizens. If signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, the bill would help put California youth on the road to a lifetime of democratic participation.
Nearly half of all eligible voters under age 30 nationwide were not registered to vote in 2008. Assembly Bill 30 extends voter registration opportunities to all 17-year-olds, not just those who will be 18 by the next election, as current California law allows. This change would "make implementation of preregistration more efficient and streamlined, and should lead to less confusion," wrote Elizabeth Wu of the New America Foundation, a nonpartisan public policy group, in a press release Tuesday. AB 30 would more effectively reach young people in high school civics classes and voter registration drives, and ultimately get them on the rolls in advance of turning the legal voting age of 18.

Voter registration is "one of the largest barriers to voting," said Steven Hill, director of the foundation's Political Reform Program, because "citizens often become energized by candidates or issue campaigns in the last weeks of an election only to find they are not registered to vote." The idea of allowing young people to register in advance not only has them ready to participate upon turning 18, but it also instills civic duty at an early age.

"Research has demonstrated that developing good 'political engagement' habits at a younger age will increase the likelihood of civic participation as an adult," said Hill. "AB 30 will help break the 'disengagement cycle' that often prevents young people from developing habits of participation that carry over into their adult years."

While several states like California already permit certain 17-year-old citizens to preregister to vote, only five extend the opportunity to all 16 or 17-year-olds. States with laws similar to the pending AB 30 include Louisiana and Oregon. Preregistration is also extended to citizens as young as 16 in states like Hawaii, Florida, and most recently, North Carolina, which passed House Bill 908 into law last month.

Rhode Island also passed a preregistration bill earlier this summer, only to be vetoed by Governor Donald Carcieri. However, FairVote - a voting rights group that has long championed preregistration in the state - hopes that with the "huge majorities in favor of the bill in both the RI House and Senate this year," the General Assembly will override the governor's veto, according to a July blog entry. Proving to be a popular year for preregistration, a similar measure was adopted by the Michigan House. The pending HB 4261 awaits a hearing in the Senate Committee on Campaign and Election Oversight.

To monitor the California and Michigan bills, visit www.ElectionLegislation.org.

El Paso County, Colo. Exemplifies Voter Reg. Turnaround for Low Income Citizens

project vote — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMT

Cross-posted to Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

More than fifteen years after the passage of the National Voter Registration Act, few states are complying with the law's requirement that voter registration services are provided to those who apply for public assistance. Though highly successful in the first two years the NVRA was implemented, in 1995-1996, registrations through public assistance agencies have steadily declined, and had fallen by 79 percent nationwide in 2007-2008. Project Vote and other voting rights organizations have been working to bring several states into compliance with this key provision of the NVRA, and-as a last resort-have been forced to bring lawsuits in several states to ensure that low-income public assistance clients have access to voter registration services as required by law.
But one Colorado county is proving what can be accomplished through voluntary compliance with the NVRA, and demonstrating that-no matter how "busy" or "underfunded" a program may be-expanding access to the democratic process for low-income residents is as simple as it is priceless.

"I know it's an additional workload issue," says Rick Bengsston, Acting Director of El Paso County Department of Human Services ."But if it becomes part of the daily process, it really isn't that difficult to get this done."

Earlier this summer, Project Vote was working with Colorado officials to bring the state into compliance, and determined that the densely populated El Paso County was seriously out of step with the NVRA. After being notified of their noncompliance in all four public assistance sites-which provide TANF, Food Stamps, Medicaid, and other benefits-Bengtsson and the Colorado Benefits Management System collaborated to integrate voter registration with regular services.

As a result, the number of clients offered voter registration services at El Paso County agencies has increased sevenfold since April. How did they make such a quick turnaround?

According to Bengsston, it was simply by making voter registration a part of the every day workload, and by holding offices accountable. "The first thing we did was make sure we had sufficient [voter registration] forms in stock," Bengtsson said. Then, they made sure every site attached voter registration applications to every public assistance form, and implemented a staff training on the NVRA and how to apply it to public assistance services.

Finally, to keep all sites accountable for providing voter registration services, Bengtsson appointed the Dept. of Human Services' quality assurance specialist to monitor voter registration at all public assistance sites in addition to the public assistance data she was already collecting.

"She now is collecting, reviewing, and tabulating the [voter registration] numbers, so she can report back to each of our managers to ensure that the appropriate steps are being taken, and that forms are being properly filled out and forwarded to the clerk and recorder," he said.

Establishing a system to monitor and evaluate agency compliance is one of the most important steps that Project Vote and its partners recommend to ensure best practices, and Bengtsson agrees. "I think the big point is having one person who is not only accountable for collecting the forms, but knowing that we're in compliance. It helps to have a compliance specialist, someone who is really analyzing and ensuring that we're following the law."

Bengtsson says another important component in keeping this opportunity available for low-income citizens is "helping staff understand the importance" of providing voter registration at public assistance agencies. "It's the law - and it's an opportunity for our citizens to participate in our political process."

Having only learned of the NVRA's mandates earlier this summer, El Paso County Commissioner Sallie Clark's main mission in providing voter registration at public assistance agencies is to make sure the county is following federal law. While expressing concerns that increasingly high numbers of public assistance clients and declining resources could impede their ability to facilitate voter registration properly, Clark recognizes the importance of voter registration access, particularly for the people that they serve.

"A majority of our clients don't have adequate transportation, and aren't in jobs that allow flexibility to go to the clerk and recorder's office during the day, so there is sometimes more concern about their basic needs than to register to vote," she said. "But I do think that offering the service in the agency - and they do visit us on a fairly regular basis - ensures that they are given the information they need to make the decision about whether they should register to vote or not."

Both Clark and Bengtsson agree that working with other state leaders to efficiently make voter registration part of the state's services is key to successfully helping citizens in need not only get public assistance, but also get a chance to participate in the democratic process.

"I think that our workers really understand the reasons behind the law, and the reasoning is to ensure that citizens who are sometimes disenfranchised have easy access to their fundamental privileges of voting." Clark said.

Restoration of Voting Rights Gains Support across the Nation

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

Cross-posted to Project Vote’s Voting Matters Blog

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cross-posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cross-posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

By Erin Ferns

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Celebrate Democracy by Including America's Future

project vote — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 16:00:00 GMT

Cross-posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

By Ari Savitsky and Erin Ferns

As we celebrate America's independence and the birth of its democracy this weekend, some states are moving toward enfranchising its future voters. A growing legislative trend following the jump in youth voter participation in the 2008 presidential election, preregistration allows soon-to-be voters to take full advantage of registration opportunities when they get their driver's licenses, fosters civic engagement in the classroom, and catalyzes lifelong participation in democracy.
This week, two states have taken steps to allow 16- and 17-year-old citizens to register to vote before being automatically enrolled as legal voters at 18, with one Rhode Island bill going to the governor and another California bill being scheduled for a July 7 Senate hearing. In the spirit of democracy, the following are some points to consider for anyone (including R.I. Governor Donald Carcieri and California's Senate Committee on Elections, Reapportionment, and Constitutional Amendments) that supports fostering a civically engaged generation of future voters.

• The Registration Gap: Once registered, young people turn out and vote at rates similar to the general population. So why is overall youth turnout historically lower? The "key difference," in the words of the U.S. Census bureau, is registration. During the 2004 election, more than 70% of Californians over the age of 25 were registered to vote, compared to fewer than 55% of Californians between 18 and 25 years old. Pre-registration addresses the registration gap by creating access to registration opportunities.
• Voting is a Habit: Past participation is a major factor in determining future participation; as important as education, parental voting patterns, or income. Once you vote, it's hard to stop. That makes the first election in which a young person is eligible to vote extremely important. When young people are registered, they will likely vote as soon as they become eligible and begin a lifetime of engagement.
• Best Practices for Democracy: 16 and 17 year olds are driving, working and paying taxes on part-time jobs. We know that getting young people engaged in civic life is incredibly important. But current registration practices make engagement less effective. Pre-registration would allow more young people to get registered when they get their driver's license, or allow a student in a civics class to take the first step to participation.
• Broad, Bi-Partisan Support: Hawaii, Florida, and Puerto Rico allow 16-year-olds to pre-register to vote. Other states, like Oregon and Maine, allow pre-registration for 17-year-olds. Many more are on their way to enactment. Members of both parties have been strong advocates of pre-registration. In Florida, County Elections Supervisor Buddy Johnson, a Republican, helped lead the charge for reform because, "most teens consider a driver's license their first - and most exciting - step to freedom. I [wanted] to make it easier for them to take another exciting step toward freedom by pre-registering to vote as they get their driver's license."

Pre-registration is be relatively easy to administer. Voter registration programs at the Department of Motor Vehicles, utilizing the voter registration mechanisms already in place, can simply be extended to include anyone over 16, actually simplifying the process by eliminating a currently non-uniform age requirement.. Sixteen- and seventeen-year-olds who pre-register will simply remain "pending" until they reach the age of 18. But while such a change is logistically simple, for a young voter-to-be, taking early action in preparation for their first election as an eligible voter is of profound importance, encouraging pride in California's and America's democratic tradition, and instilling that tradition in the hearts of a new generation of Californians.

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

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

Cross-posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

By Erin Ferns

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

By Erin Ferns

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Glenn Beck Sees Boogeymen: Conservatives and Race

Bertha Lewis — Sat, 09 May 2009 00:00:00 GMT

If you didn’t see ACORN spokesman Scott Levenson take on Glenn Beck on Wednesday, you missed a bit of a dust-up. Enough of a dust-up for Keith Olbermann to name Beck his “Worst Person in the World” for Thursday May 7.

For most of the nine minutes, Beck did his best to continue the rich Fox News tradition of smearing ACORN’s work, especially around the voter registration drive we did last year. Scott did his best to give as good as he got.

For the most part, he did pretty well, I’d say, forcing Beck to shut off his mike one point. (Here’s an aside: Why is it that right-wing radio and TV hosts always prattle on about the first amendment when they get called out for their hate speech, but when they can’t bully guests into submission, then need to cut the other guy’s mike? Are they scared to actually deal in facts?)

But the real confrontation happened off-screen, when, during a commercial break, Beck said that ACORN was “bad for America” and Scott responded, “You’re just afraid of black people.” You can almost see Beck’s head explode in this clip.

Follow me over the flip for more on how Beck exemplifies the problems conservatives have with race.

Oh the outrage! But the real point about this incident is how the right wing perceives the issue of race. Here’s Matthew Yglesias on this point from yesterday,

“Glenn Beck, by contrast, like most conservatives, think that the preeminent racial problem in the United States is that white people are too put upon by political correctness. Conservatives are very very very concerned about this alleged problem of anti-racism run amok. And they’re very concerned about the alleged problem of reverse discrimination. But they don’t seem concerned at all about racism or discrimination and certainly not nearly as concerned as they about helping out the poor, put-upon white man.”

Right.

Or as Ellen at NewsHounds said,

“Of course, Beck and Fox can demonize ACORN and minorities all day long, but my, how sensitive Beck's widdle feewings get when the tables are turned.”

Let me be crystal clear about this. ACORN’s 2008 voter registration program, in which we helped 1.3 million Latinos and African-Americans complete voter registration applications, would not have been the subject of so many attacks and hysteria if we’d been conducting it in mostly-white affluent suburbs. But because the program targeted some of the most marginalized constituencies in the United States, it not only posed a threat to the status quo, but it tapped into deeply held suspicions and stereotypes about people of color. ACORN became the proxy for “Black people are coming to take your stuff.”

And conservative activists can’t seem to help themselves when it comes to us. We’re the boogeyman in their closet, the organization onto which they can project all the manifestations of their lizard-brain fear of people with skin darker then theirs.

It would be funny if it weren’t so dangerous. It would be pathetic if it wasn’t used by conservatives as a way of distracting huge sections of the American people from some of the practices that affect all working families, not just those of color. The folks at News Corpse make this point:

“While Beck and his ilk get so worked up about an organization working to help low income communities - even though the things they allege produce no harm except to ACORN itself - these same guardians of virtue don’t seem to care much about the criminal behavior of defense contractors who have been responsible for outfitting our soldiers with faulty gear, electrocuting them in their showers, and bilking American taxpayers for billions of dollars.”

Make no mistake. ACORN members, regular people from places like Watts in Los Angeles, Apopka in Orlando, Anacostia in DC, Phillips in Minneapolis, or Lents in Portland (to name just some of the neighborhoods in which ACORN members live), stand up every day for low- and moderate-income families and families of color. And whether it is addressing the devastation of the foreclosure crisis, the need for health care for all, calling for a raise in the minimum wage, or helping rebuild from the destruction of Hurricane Katrina, ACORN members will continue to do so, no matter what Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, or Michelle Bachmann has to say about us.

So get ready for more whining from the winguts because we’re just getting warmed up.

Bad Election Bill Riles Up Advocates, Concerns Fla. Governor

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

For most states this year, the economic crisis has taken precedent over other serious policy issues, including election reform. In fact, the few key states that are dedicating this year's session to election reform instead of major budget issues are stirring up voters as they put their rights on the line. Like the highly publicized battles to pass voter ID in Texas and proof-of-citizenship registration requirements in Georgia, Florida's notorious 80-plus page omnibus election bill takes the cake in breaking the spirit of democracy.
The Florida legislature is currently under fire for suddenly focusing on what critics call "draconian" measures that could potentially suppress voters.

"Our state faces the most dramatic budget crisis in recent memory and lawmakers are fast-tracking a bill loaded with costs that will discourage voter participation?" said Florida Public Interest Group spokesman, Brad Ashwell in a St. Petersburg Times report Monday.

Companion bills SB 956 and HB 7149 propose to raise multiple voting barriers through voter ID limitations, voter registration drive restrictions, excessive voter purges and increased reliance upon provisional ballots.

Although State Senator Alex Dias de la Portilla (R-Miami) claimed that the measures were a "response to complaints and problems in the 2008 elections" in an April 15 New York Times report, the legislature is virtually shutting off public input while denying an explanation for how the bill would address those complaints.

"This ridiculous bill [SB 956] surfaced in the dead of night with no attempt to really discuss, question or debate what was going on," said Rep. Janet Long (D-Seminole) in the St. Petersburg Times report. According to the report, public testimony was limited in the Senate to "about 10 minutes, and a House council shut down debate after only six minutes and denied several people the chance to testify in public."

Serious criticisms of the bills were aired in the New York Times' Sunday editorial, which noted the bills' potential impact on the state's "sizable" elderly voting bloc, as well as its poor and minority voters.

The bills would restrict the use of photo IDs from retirement centers or neighborhood associations at the polls, an amendment that "would be a serious hardship for the many elderly people who do not have driver's licenses.

"The legislation would also impose onerous and unnecessary rules on voter registration drives, including a requirement that registration forms must be turned in within 48 hours," the Times editorialized. "Grass-roots voter registration drives play an important role in getting poor and minority voters registered. If this legislation passes, however, many groups may stop registering voters rather than risk jail sentences or fines."

The Times also raised concern over the bills' provision to "require election officials to purge voter rolls more frequently," noting the state's "sore point" regarding improper purges of voter rolls before the 2000 election, which resulted in the disenfranchisement of eligible voters.

Mobile voters, who tend to be young, low income, and minority citizens would also be affected by the measures, which would "require any voter whose address changes less than 29 days before an election to cast a provisional ballot," the St. Petersburg Times wrote. Those voters, however "can now update their addresses at the polls when they vote."

On Thursday, more than 38 voting rights groups, including Project Vote signed a letter to Republican Governor Charlie Crist, urging him to "speak out forcefully against these bills and to veto any resultant legislation." The groups continued, "instead of fixing real problems-such as expanding access to early voting as you directed in November-they would disenfranchise eligible Floridians, for no legitimate reason and at significant taxpayer expense."

While the bill quickly advances in the legislature, the uncertainty of Florida's voting rights remains in question. According to the New York Times, "some of the proposed changes may have to be reviewed by the Department of Justice. Because of past voter-discrimination complaints, five counties in the state must have any changes to registration procedures cleared by the federal government."

Crist has questioned the necessity of the bill, "strongly" hinting that he may veto it if it passes the legislature.

"What is it we're trying to cure?" asked Crist in the St. Petersburg Times report. "The more opportunity you give people to vote, the better it is for democracy. So that aspect of it concerns me."

To monitor SB 956 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.

Revamping Voter Registration to Reduce Disparities in the Electorate

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Automating Voter Registration Procedures

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

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

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

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

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

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

States Move to Create Culture of Voter Engagement through Preregistration

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

By Erin Ferns

The rising levels of voter participation among the nation's youth continue to be challenged by the current voter registration system, perpetuating the difficulty of fostering lifelong voters. Some states are proposing to take this challenge into their own hands by making voter registration accessible to citizens as young as 16. Already widely accessible at schools and departments of motor vehicles, the move would allow future voters in some states to automatically be enrolled on the voter rolls on their 18th birthdays, a change that advocates say could "close the registry gap between young voters and the rest of the population."
California and Rhode Island are among the states that have introduced legislation permitting 16- and 17-year-old citizens to register to vote in advance of their 18th birthdays. Rhode Island bills, SB 85 and HB 5005 show promise to pass the legislature - a prospect that is nothing new to the state, which has passed such bills three years in a row only to have them vetoed by the governor, according to research and advocacy group, Fair Vote.

"It's good public policy to get young people involved as early as possible in the democratic process," said Fair Vote Rhode Island Director Matt Sledge in Brown University's Daily Herald last week. The preregistration bill, he said, would "close the registry gap between young voters and the rest of the population."

Today, multiple states allow certain citizens under age 18 to preregister to vote, including Rhode Island and California. However, Hawaii and Florida are the only states to have enacted dedicated preregistration laws that permit all citizens as young as 16 to register to vote, which advocates argue is the best way to incorporate youth into the democratic process.

Institutionalizing preregistration not only makes it easier to conduct and participate in voter registration activities on high school campuses and DMVs since it captures more young people before they graduate, but it also helps "boost the effectiveness of civics education by tying it directly to civic participation through the opportunity to preregister," according to a Fair Vote report. The report further notes that "uniform" preregistration laws, like those in Hawaii and Florida, help alleviate general voter registration ills by acting as a "cost-effective step toward greater standardization, which means a cleaner, more accurate data set. Pre-registration could also save money and minimize human error by allowing students to register year round at points of civic engagement and education..."

Advocates say California is a prime place to engage and enfranchise its diverse population, which is "especially apparent in high schools today." According to a 2007 proposal for preregistration in California by the public policy group, New America Foundation, "if young people are not hooked into democratic institutions and practices while they're in high school, it becomes more difficult to do so after they leave high school."

The group emphasized that young people become more difficult to "contact or engage" directly after high school, resulting in a "'disengagement cycle' that becomes increasingly difficult to break. High school, in many cases, is the final opportunity to fully engage young people about participating in our democracy. Having common sense practices for engaging young people in high school is crucial. One of the most effective efforts is to lower the age for voter registration to sixteen."

Although California has yet to pass a bill to lower the voter registration age to 16, there is still an effort underway. Last week, preregistration bill AB 30 was reported favorably out of committee last week. It is now pending in the Assembly committee on Appropriations.

California and Rhode Island also show that they are on the right track toward engaging young people by mandating schools to serve as voter registration agencies or to facilitate drives on campus, both effective ways to facilitate civic engagement through education. The next step is to combine those good laws with legislation to lower the "effective engagement age" in order to capture more future voters while helping standardize the voter registration system in general.

Rhode Island senator and sponsor of SB 85, Rhoda Perry agrees that preregistration would "get more people involved in the civic process," the Brown Daily Herald reported. The only problem with the bill, she said, is that "the governor vetoes it." There is hope for future voters in Rhode Island, however, as preregistration is increasing gaining support in the legislature, a change that Perry said may be just enough to override the governor's veto.

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

Project Vote Analysis Documents a More Diverse Electorate in 2008

project vote — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 22:24:57 GMT

The November 2008 election saw dramatic increases in participation by traditionally underrepresented groups, including Americans of color and young voters, according to a new research memorandum released by Project Vote yesterday.
In the memorandum, Douglas R. Hess, researcher and author of 2007 Project Vote report, Representational Bias in the 2006 Election, analyzes newly released data from the U.S. Census Bureau's Current Population Survey, the definitive source of demographic data on registration and voting in America. The analysis examines participation in the 2008 general election by race/ethnicity, age, and income status, resulting in the first comprehensive picture of who voted in 2008 compared to 2004.

"The exciting story from 2008 is not that overall turnout increased, but that the electorate we heard from at the polls more closely resembled the true demographics and diversity of the American people," said Michael Slater, executive director of Project Vote in a press release yesterday.

Historically, participation among African-Americans, Latinos, and young voters has lagged disproportionately behind other groups, but the Project Vote analysis suggests that this situation improved in 2008.

* African-American turnout surged from 60.3 percent in 2004 to 65.2 percent (an increase representing over 2 million voters) in 2008;
* Latino-American turnout increased by 2.5 percentage points from 47.3 to 49.7 percent (also an increase of over 2 million voters).
* Asian-American turnout increased about 3 percentage points from 44.5 to 47.8 percent (more than 600,000 additional voters).
* Turnout among young Americans between ages 18 and 30 increased by about 2 percentage points (an increase of 2.3 million voters).
* More than 5.4 million more votes were cast in 2008 than in 2004, and 4.9 million-or 91 percent of the additional votes-were from people of color.

The largest turnout rate gains were among young minority Americans. While White turnout in the under-30 age group was essentially unchanged between the two elections, turnout by African-Americans under 30 increased nearly 9 percentage points, which represents nearly 700,000 additional African-American voters under 30. Asian-American youth turnout also increased by an estimated 9.6 percentage points, and Latino youth turnout increased by 5.2 percentage points.

While these increases in participation are encouraging, Hess points out that there is still room for improvement. There still appears to be significant disparities in participation based on income, for example. While comparisons to 2004 based on income were not readily available for technical reasons, in 2008 there was a 20 point gap in the registration rate between Americans from households earning $25,000 or less per year and those earning over $100,000.

"Moreover," the memo says, "although there were gains among young voters, only half of voters under the age of 30 voted in 2008, leaving over 21 million citizens in that group alone sitting on the sidelines on Election Day."

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.

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

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

by Erin Ferns and Donald Wine II

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Youth Voter Participation Update

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

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

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

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

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

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