(More on the many layers of voter suppression & the war on democracy. - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)
Expanding ballot access to all voting-age citizens, particularly the millions who are living and working in our communities with past felony convictions, has been the foundation of many advocates' pleas to make American life equitable. Whether wrapped in an argument to fend against racism, classism, or even "overcriminalization," felon advocates' main issue boils down to preserving the civil rights of every citizen who participates in society, no matter their personal history.
Congress has been paying attention to the federal government's apparent tendency toward "overcriminalization" or "penchant for writing new laws to criminalize conduct that could be addressed with fines or other remedies," that ultimately overfill prisons and unfairly restrict otherwise productive citizens of important rights, such as voting, according to a McClatchy Newspapers report earlier this month.
For example, Abner Schoenwetter, a seafood importer, spent six years in prison for agreeing to purchase lobster tails that violated harvest regulations in Honduras. Now, the 64-year-old Florida man "is a convicted felon with an ailing wife, no job or right to vote and three years of supervised release ahead of him."
"We're talking about people's freedom and the way it affects people's faith in their government or lack thereof. We've got to get this cleaned up," said Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) at a hearing in the House Judiciary subcommittee hearing recently.
"Overcriminalization" particularly hurts citizens in states with more restrictive rules on felon disenfranchisement. All but two states restrict convicted felons from voting rights at some point in their sentences, leaving four million citizens voiceless, but "free" in our communities, a disproportionate number belonging African-American or low-income neighborhoods. Earlier this year, Congress attempted to address this issue by setting a federal standard for disenfranchisement rules with the introduction of the Democracy Restoration Act. But, the bill hasn't progressed since March.
Overcriminalization and the lack of a federal standard for disenfranchisement rules exacerbates the criminal justice system's inherent racial and economic biases that affect the quality of life of both the released convicted felons as well as the communities to which they return.
Schedule conflicts, work commitments, and transportation issues are just a few reasons why some voters don't show up on Election Day. To help remedy this issue, 32 states have enacted Early In-Person (EIP) voting laws, which have been overwhelmingly favored by voters. While this trend is mainly absent in the northeastern United States, Maryland is currently test-driving its new law this week, perhaps creating a precedent for surrounding states.
"It's a little bit of variety for the voters," said Anthony Gutierrez, director of Maryland's Wicomico County Board of Elections in The Daily Times. The "variety" of voting options didn't come easy to the state, which introduced early voting laws not once, but twice over the last few years.
(This is virtually the same sort of Bush-Administration type of move by the Obama DOJ I described yesterday with respect to undermining progress on the greeenhouse gas front. Again, this is a situation in which there is NO GOP obstructionism that one can point your finger at. This all a matter of internal Obama Administration decisionmaking. - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)
A two-year battle in the courts concluded this week when the Department of Justice approved Georgia's controversial voter verification system that was originally struck down in 2009 as inaccurate, unreliable, and worst of all, discriminatory against people of color and naturalized citizens. The decision leaves voting rights advocates dismayed as to why the DOJ would allow the state to implement this arguably overzealous and potentially disenfranchising procedure.
Next week marks the 90th anniversary of the American woman's right to vote. Since the passage of the 19th amendment, women have generally been more likely to turn out to vote than men. However there is one area of federal election law that some states undermine, which disproportionately disadvantages women, particularly low income citizens and minorities.
Access to voter registration-the basis of democratic participation-is still limited in the 21st century by overly restrictive, "horse-and-buggy" laws across the country. Despite advances in technology, states struggle with politically charged or neglected election systems when such systems can (and should) simply focus on building a truly representative electorate in modern day America.
Participating in democracy should be a simple exercise for anyone who is a citizen over the age of 18, but as voter registration and turnout stats indicate, it’s not always that easy. On their way to the polls, too many people encounter barriers and obstacles, and too often these impediments are a result of varying, nuanced election administration procedures across the United States. As a new Project Vote report illustrates, examples of many of these election administration dos and don’ts can be found in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Community driven voter registration drives are still the gateway to democracy to millions of Americans. However, after the overall success of voter registration drives in 2008, states have increasingly imposed severe restrictions on voter registration activity. With more than 60 million unregistered Americans missing the opportunity to have a voice in their communities, lawmakers and advocates must recognize the significance of voter registration drives and work to facilitate and improve such practices with the help of effective regulations and modern technology.
Voter registration modernization is a current buzzword in election circles. The idea is that new information tools can make the process cheaper, better, and easier for voters and officials alike. However, at many election forums, this discussion has tended to overlook modernizing the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, the so-called "motor-voter" law.
Hopefully, that is about to change. The NVRA, which is the only federal law requiring states to proactively offer voter registration services, relies on a range of state agencies to help people to register. Overall, it has helped tens of millions of Americans. Yet agencies in many states--particularly public assistance offices-have dropped the ball in recent years. That trend is troubling because millions more Americans would likely register if asked by designated NVRA agencies.
The excuses are not new. Some state agencies do not see voter registration as their job, regardless of the federal mandate. Still others see voter registration as a paper-based process generating too much bureaucratic work.
What is new today is that voter registration services need not follow these antiquated models. Today's paperless information technology and large-scale data management-including practices pioneered in several states at their motor vehicle offices and online-show many cost-efficient, bureaucracy-cutting and more accurate ways to offer registration services. These savings are striking and should resonate in today's tough budget times.
These precedents are detailed in a comprehensive new Project Vote report, Voter Registration Modernization and the NVRA, by Steven Rosenfeld. Several state motor vehicle offices are now using software templates, shared databases, data networks and other tools to overcome hurdles associated with implementing the law. Tasks such as training staff, developing registration materials, offering clients opportunities to register, assisting with applications, sending forms to election offices, and tracking results, have all been transformed and simplified.
Cross-posted at Project Vote's blog, Voting Matters
As Michigan considers following the dangerous example of Arizona's controversial anti-immigration law, one of the candidates for the state's chief election official is fanning the flames of hysteria in a way that threatens voting rights.
Modernizing voter registration services has been a big theme in policy and government circles since the 2008 presidential election. But a new effort by the Department of Justice to better implement a 20th century voting rights law, the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA)-known as the motor voter bill-could make equally big waves, potentially adding millions of voters to official lists.
There is an art in politics to not over-reaching and not over-reacting. But the latest salvo by one of the best-known conservative voting rights activists at his former workplace-the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, which enforces federal voting rights law-crosses a new line: urging states to ignore the DOJ on voting rights.
Some progressives overlook that voting by mail does not always help their longtime constituents.
As state and county officials look for ways to streamline elections during tough budgetary times, many jurisdictions are increasingly relying on mail-based voting-and winning praises from progressives for doing so. But the true litmus test for any election reform should be whether it helps expand the franchise to those whose voices are missing in our democracy. What some groups may overlook in their enthusiasm about voting by mail is that it does not always serve underrepresented or vulnerable populations as well as traditional polls.
What do voters really think about dramatic changes already underway?
by Steven Rosenfeld
Today's political chattering class-television barkers, talk radio hotheads, and even 2010's most visible candidates-keep telling Americans how angry and flustered we have become, and that the solution has to do with reeling in a government run amok.
Another big state has taken steps to modernize voter registration at its motor vehicle offices. The Texas Department of Public Safety, which oversees state driver licenses and identification cards, has instituted a new system that simplifies the voter registration process.
A disturbing and growing hysteria over immigration—most evident in Arizona’s horrifyingly oppressive new law—has now spread into election administration legislation in at least one state. On the same day that the Maine Republican Party adopted a blatantly xenophobic Tea Party platform, the Tennessee Senate injected anti-immigrant sentiment into a draconian bill to require proof of citizenship when registering to vote.
