disenfranchisement

With registration deadlines, early voting, and election day fast approaching, there are a lot of concerns about protecting the voting rights of students. We've already seen some attempts at disenfranchisement in Waller County, Texas, and at Virginia Tech, and a new report - Vanishing Voters - put out by the PIRGs this week gives us even more cause for concern.

Considering the recent history of young voter disenfranchisement, I thought I'd highlight a few projects that are hoping to protect the vote.

Tomorrow, staffers from Student PIRG and SAVE, along with supportive elected officials, will be testifying before congress on the issue:

On Thursday, September 25th, the Committee on House Administration will hold a hearing – “Ensuring the Rights of College Students to Vote.” The purpose of the hearing is to hear from a range of expert witnesses about the challenges that face students when they vote and solutions that will overcome those barriers.

Sujatha Jahagirdar, Program Director for the Student PIRGs' New Voters Project, will testify about the barriers to student voting we have encountered in our decades of work on the ground to register young voters. Additional expert witnesses will include Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL); Sheri Iachetta, Deputy Registrar, Charlottesville County, Virginia; Marvin Krislov, President, Oberlin College; and Mathew Sagel, Executive Director, SAVE.

In an attempt to democratize the process, SAVE and the PIRGs are asking young people to submit their own questions to congress about student voting rights.

SAVE has also partnered with Campus Advantage to create a one-stop-shop for Student Voting Rights.

Bumped - Mike.

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

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

By Erin Ferns

While many see voting as an implicit right in a representative democracy, decisions in America about who can vote and how are actually controlled by the states and vary greatly from state-to-state, even from county-to-county.

Misinformation and misinterpretation of each state's particular laws—not only by voters, but also by state officials—has the potential to influence the outcome of the election, a problem seen recently as two of the country’s most disenfranchised groups – youth and former felons –have encountered procedural roadblocks to electoral participation.

Large voter registration drives are underway in Virginia, but the Roanoke Times has recently reported on problems that may hinder the participation of Virginia students. According to Kevin Litten of the Roanoke Times on Saturday, allegations of voter intimidation came out of Virginia Tech last week, when Montgomery County Registrar Randy Wertz issued a news release warning students that registering using their college addresses would be changing their permanent addresses. This, according to Wertz, could “affect student’s scholarships or tax filings, and would obligate them to change car registrations and their driver's licenses.”

Litten reports that officials from the Obama campaign, which has been conducting voter registration activities in Virginia, countered that “they had never heard of students' dependency status on their parents' tax forms affected by their voter registration,” and that the “other laws mentioned in the release are rarely enforced or subject to interpretation.” The officials worried that the statements could have a “chilling effect” on voter registration efforts, but Wertz denied that intimidating students was his intention, insisting that “his focus is making sure elections run smoothly and fairly.”

Fair and smooth elections become even more difficult when more voters are involved and the state is ill prepared. Wednesday's Roanoke Times expressed concerns that the influx of newly registered students—assigned to what is already the county's most populated precinct—could create long lines and transportation problems on Election Day.

The precinct, E-1, already has 3,600 active voters; the state is required to split precincts when they exceed 5,000 voters, but officials say it is too late to obtain Justice Department approval for the split if E-1 exceeds capacity before November. To at least help alleviate the waiting period to vote, officials say they are making efforts to hire extra officials to run the polls. But, to make matters worse, the polling place assigned for the precinct is located four miles from campus without connecting public transportation – a potential problem for students without cars.

Bumped. -Craig

Cross-posted at Project Vote's blog Voting Matters

By Nathan Henderson-James

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

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

Here’s the backstory. The community organization ACORN has recently completed a voter registration drive in Milwaukee aimed at historically disenfranchised populations like low-income folks and African-Americans. The drive assisted voters complete some 35,000 cards. So far so good.

However, some of ACORN’s canvassers were caught forging cards in order to get paid for not doing the work. Under Wisconsin law all cards filled out, completely or incompletely, fraudulently or not, are required to be turned in. Out of the 35,000 cards, ACORN and Board of Elections officials estimate that about 1500-2000 of them had problems. The bulk of those were simple incompletes, but about 200 or so were clearly attempts by canvassers to defraud both ACORN and the state of Wisconsin by submitting false cards.

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

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

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

“Well, yes, I actually do support voter suppression. I am in favor of suppressing the vote of dead people, nonexistent people, convicted felons, illegal aliens, people voting more than once, et al. Every time one of these people votes, it cancels out my legitimate vote.

A simple thing like photo ID for voting would eliminate these fraudulent voters when they showed up at the polls.”

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

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

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

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

Cross-posted at Project Vote's Voting Matters Blog

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

By Erin Ferns

In 2000, Florida’s disastrous effort to purge former felons from voter rolls resulted in the disenfranchisement of hundreds if not thousands of legitimate voters and clearly influenced the outcome of the presidential contest in that state. History may repeat itself this November with states taking potentially reckless and unlawful measures to clean voter rolls before Election Day.

Voter purges are one of several problems in the administration of elections that could not only bar legal voters from the polls, but could potentially influence the outcome of close races. Project Vote is monitoring this practice across the United States and sees what could be an alarming trend of illegal purging emerging. The New York Times and Mississippi's Clarion Ledger both reported on voter purging problems in the South this week.

Keeping accurate and current voter rolls is an important legal mandate for election officials. Under the National Voter Registration Act, states are required to contact voters directly through forwardable mail. If the voter does not respond, the state must wait two federal elections before removing the voter from the rolls. However, many states have begun to compare their voter rolls with those of neighboring states and pro-actively canceling a voter's registration based on a positive “match” rather than following the list maintenance procedures of NVRA.

Project Vote has recently expressed concern to Louisiana Secretary of State Jay Dardenne over the state's method of removing voters from rolls, as reported in the Times on Tuesday. Project Vote has learned that Louisiana compares voter lists with other jurisdictions, purging voters solely upon apparent database matches of first name, last name and birth date. With millions of people living in a multi-state region, it is not uncommon to find more than one John Smith born on the same day. Additionally, the possibility of human and typographical error that occur in all large databases creates a greater risk of unjustified disenfranchisement.

“A spokesman for Louisiana's secretary of state said that all voters found to have duplicate registrations were sent at least one warning letter and sometimes two, but that the last such actions were done some 13 months ago,” the Times reported.

“'We're specifically not doing it right in front of an election,'” said Dardenne's spokesman.
Election officials in Madison County, Miss. have recently decided to forgo a potentially illegal mass mailing process as part of their effort to purge the county’s voter rolls after the U.S. Justice Department and others warned against it, according the Clarion Ledger Tuesday. Last week, Project Vote sent a letter to the elections commission out of concern that their mass mailing plan violated the Voting Rights Act.

“They are doing something that is understandable when you have a voter roll that appears to be out of proportion,” said voting rights lawyers who works with Project Vote, Estelle Rogers. “But there are a lot of Ps and Qs that must be followed.”

County supervisor Karl Banks repeatedly voted against the mass mailing, saying that “his understanding of the law was that commissioners needed a reason to believe that a voter's information may not be accurate.” He argued that in this presidential election year, the commission should focus on making sure elections run smoothly, such as informing people of their correct precinct.

“The mildest things confuse people and can ultimately disenfranchise people during elections...Here we are wanting to disenfranchise people because they don't send a card back?”

The emerging trend of state compacts to compare voter databases and engage in aggressive efforts to purge their voter rolls is troubling for both its opacity – the public is not informed of the criteria for being purged nor are purged voters offered the chance to remedy the situation – and its reliance on strict matching criteria. Large databases are riddled with errors, therefore the sole reliance on exact matches virtually guarantees that legal voters will be knocked off the rolls and denied the right to vote.
The Florida example from 2000 should be instructive on on how these practices could affect the outcome of closely contested races on Election Day.

Quick Links:

Contact:

Louisiana Secretary of State Jay Dardenne

Madison County (Miss.) Board of Supervisors

Reports:

“Maintaining Current and Accurate Voters Lists.” Project Vote. Dec. 22, 2006.

“A Summary of the National Voter Registration Act.” Project Vote.

“A Summary of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.” Project Vote.

In Other News:

Federal judge weighs challenge to AZ voter id law - Tucson Citizen [Ariz.]
PHOENIX (AP) -- A federal judge is weighing a challenge to Arizona requirements for voter identification and proof of citizenship for registering to vote.

County voter drive blocked: Fewer New Citizens Registered After US Agency Changes Rule - Mercury News [Ca.]
It was a procedure that produced a bumper crop of new voters: Just before Santa Clara County immigrants were sworn in as U.S. citizens, they got voter-registration cards and were shown how to fill them out. At the conclusion of the naturalization ceremony, most new citizens had signed the cards and handed them in to become registered voters.

State Says It May Sue VA - Associated Press
Connecticut officials say the state might sue the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs if it continues to block efforts to educate and register voters in federal veterans' facilities.

Voter-sign-up drive targets 16-year olds - Miami Herald
Voter registration for next month's primary election will end Monday, and the push now is aimed at teens who are too young to cast a ballot

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

From a press release I just received from Student PIRG:

Student PIRG New Voters Project staff stationed at polling locations near Indiana campuses today are beginning to hear from young voters turned away at the polls for a failure to meet voter identification laws upheld by the Supreme Court last week. The law, which requires voters to possess in-state or federal identification, such as an Indiana Driver’s License or federal passport, has been widely criticized for creating additional voting barriers. Three incidents of student voters turned away from the polls documented by Student PIRG staff in past two hours are included below. To contact profiled voters, please contact Sujatha Jahagirdar at (323) 309 6120.

19-year old Angela Hiss, a sophomore and computer science major at the University of Notre Dame, was turned away from the polls this afternoon as she attempted to vote in her first election. After arriving at her polling location, she presented several forms of identification - her school ID, a piece of mail that showed her campus address and an Illinois driver’s license – but was misinformed that she could not vote because she could not show in-state ID. Poll-workers, according to Hiss, also did not advise her that she could cast a provisional ballot, as required by state and federal law. Instead, they suggested visiting local Department of Motor Vehicles to obtain the in-state identification required by Indiana’s newly-upheld law, an endeavor that could take hours, she explained. Furthermore, while the law allows her ten days to obtain the required ID from the DMV, Hiss’s travel plans will not give her time. As a result, she said, she will not be able to vote in the primary.

19-year old Allyson Miller, a sophomore at the University of Notre Dame and volunteer at a local children’s clinic was similarly turned away from the polls today. An Indiana resident since the age of five, Miller left her driver’s license in her dorm room, and arrived straight from class at the polls with her school ID and registration confirmation papers from the County Registrar. Upon arriving, however, poll-workers did not allow her to vote without a state-issued ID. “I plan to come back because voting is a big deal to me,” said Miller, “but it’s a huge inconvenience, especially with a final tomorrow.”

19-year old Becky Jenkins, a sophomore and member of the tennis team at Butler University was also unable to vote in her first election today. “I didn’t know that I had to have an Indiana ID,” she said after she was turned away from the polls for attempting to cast her ballot using a driver’s licenses issued by the State of Illinois. When asked if she would instead cast a provisional ballot, Jenkins also said her travel plans wouldn’t allow her to.

The National Journal is running an important article on new, restrictive voting laws and the effect such laws might have on the youth vote. If anything is going to slow down the amazing spike we're seeing in participation, it's going to be laws like these that either outright disenfranchise new voters, or at the very least erect substantial barriers to participation. Honestly I'm a little worried that 2008 might make Ohio 2004 and Florida 2000 look like the poster-children for universal suffrage.

At a time when young Americans are registering to vote in record numbers, a variety of fresh obstacles threaten their participation. This could create massive Election Day headaches for youth and adult voters alike.

"We're looking at a fairly serious train wreck," says Gary Kalman, who heads the federal legislative office for the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG).

The problem: A slew of restrictive new election laws take direct aim at the very voters -- the "Millennial" crowd aged 30 and under -- who have helped swell the rolls and crowd primaries in recent months. These include state laws that impose tough new restrictions on voter registration, disqualify voters because of minor database errors and require a photo ID, such as a driver's license, at the polls.

[...]

By some estimates, the younger-than-30 generation now numbers 50 million, a quarter of the voting-age population. Their recent rush to register and turn out is a positive signal that Americans haven't given up on their problem-plagued voting system just yet. There's a risk that these young voters' first attempt to cast ballots could turn into a nightmare -- both for them and for those standing in line behind them.

"From the registration to the polling places to the actual ID, students face enormous hurdles," said Kalman, of U.S. PIRG. "And it's something we're going to have to get over if we want the next generation to be active in politics."

Matt Singer is the CEO of Forward Montana, a state-based organization dedicated to increasing youth involvement in progressive politics.

Watching from afar, the massive pushback on the Yepsen BS in Iowa has been heartening. These college students have the right to caucus. Period. All the efforts to imply otherwise are voter suppression, plain and simple.

All that said, I'm left wondering why the Obama campaign isn't fighting back more with student surrogates. No doubt the campaign has some native Iowa leaders in their Students for Obama who could swing back -- and help demonstrate the extent to which the Obama campaign wants to empower students.

The Iowa PIRGs have done a great job putting students in the vanguard of their pushback of the Presidential campaigns -- and students fighting for the student voice makes for great copy.

So from here in Montana, a big hats off to the PIRGs, Young Dems, Rock the Vote, and everyone else fighting for the right to caucus.