swing states

Vote Back Home

Add one more website to the growing list aimed at helping students strategically cast their ballots, and recruit their friends to do the same:

Vote Back Home

The site is designed to help students in "safe" states organize the students on their campus who are from battleground states. In that way, it's very similar to CountMore, which tries to direct students to vote either at home or at school based on where that vote will have the greatest impact.

Vote Back Home provides organizers with downloadable kits on voter registration for every state, and a wealth of data to help them make the best strategic decisions. Included in that is data on the number of students from each battleground state currently attending school elsewhere:

Pennsylvania --- 76632 Pennsylvania students are away at college in other states.
Ohio --- 62484 Ohioans are away at college in other states.
Florida --- 50452 Floridians are away at college in other states.
Virginia --- 49640 Virginians are away at college in other states.
Wisconsin --- 38708 are away at college in other states.
Michigan --- 36560 Michiganders are away at college in other states.
Colorado --- 32108 Coloradoans are away at college in other states.
Missouri --- 31884 are away at college in other states.
Indiana --- 29380 Hoosiers are away at college in other states.
Iowa --- 16948 Iowans are away at college in other states.
New Mexico --- 12700 are away at college in other states.
Nevada --- 10368 are away at college in other states.

The site also provides a list of the top 300 colleges and universities ranked by how many students are originally from swing states and what percentage of the student body that represents, giving organizers an idea as to how densely populated their campus is with swing students, and how many potential registrants they can find.

The one thing I would say it is missing are the margins of victory. It's useful to know that in 2004, Kerry lost New Mexico by less than 6,000 votes, whereas Kerry lost to Bush in Virginia by hundreds of thousands of votes.

Even so, it's a super-simple with a wealth of information that could help a lot of students organize more efficiently if word got around. So please spread the word.

Count More - Strategic Voting for Students

As we come up on voter registration deadlines, a lot of students may be asking themselves, "where should I vote?" Unlike the rest of us, college students have the luxury of deciding whether they would prefer to vote at school or in their home states.

As we all know, not all states are created equally in our elections. Some states - known as battleground states or swing states - will decide the election and carry much more weight than "safe" red or blue states like New York, California, or Utah. In cases where a student lives in a safe state but attends school in a swing state, or vice-versa, deciding where to cast a ballot is a no-brainer: pick the swing state. But what if you have a choice between two different battleground states? In that instance, it's a little harder to know what to do.

A new website - CountMore - hopes to help students make that choice.

CountMore

Created by Front Seat, a civic software company out of Seattle, CountMore offers a simple solution to help students decide where best to cast their ballot. All the student needs to do is go to the CountMore website and select their home state and school state from two drop down menus. The site's algorithm then uses previous election results, current polling data, and the number of electoral votes in play to rank the importance of each state and determine where the student's ballot can have the greatest impact.

Here's a closer look at how CountMore makes those decisions:

How do we decide which states count more? First, we categorize states into the following tiers:

  1. Critical Tipping Point State: States that the non-partisan polling website FiveThirtyEight.com identifies as "Tipping Point States" that are more than 40% likely to tip the election. These states are currently: Ohio and Colorado
  2. Tipping Point State: States that the non-partisan polling website FiveThirtyEight.com identifies as "Tipping Point States" that are more than 10% likely to tip the election. These states are currently:Virginia, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Florida.
  3. Margin < 5%: States where pollster.com is reporting less than 5% polling difference or the 2004 election margin was less than than 5%. These states are currently: Iowa, Indiana, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oregon, Wisconsin, and West Virginia.
  4. Margin < 10%: States where pollster.com is reporting less than 10% polling difference or the 2004 election margin was less than than 10%. These states are currently: Arkansas, California, Delaware, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maine, Missouri, North Carolina, North Dakota, New Jersey, and Washington.
  5. All other states.

Then, our algorithm compares the two states and recommends the state in the highest tier. In the case of a tie, we declare a toss up.

Note: Algorithm data was last sampled on 9/19/2008 and may change over time.

This is not the first site to attempt to optimize the effectiveness of people's ballots. In 2000, websites like Nader Trader, VoteSwap and VoteExchange attempted to let people in "safe" states voting for Gore swap their votes with citizens in battleground states voting for Nader. That way, Gore could rack up votes in swing states that would have otherwise gone to Nader, and Nader could shoot for his 5% margin (which would have guaranteed the Green Party federal funds in the next election) through votes in dark red and dark blue states that would not influence the election's outcome.

While such sites were not illegal in 2000, many claimed they were unethical. For students and organizers holding such qualms about CountMore, the group's website has compiled an extensive FAQ running down the merits and ethics of strategic voting, as well as general questions students may have about voting deadlines and registration problems (such as those plaguing Virginia students).

Obviously the vote trading sites of 2000 weren't enough to tip the election in Florida, and it's not at all clear that CountMore could be any more effective. But in an election season in which young voters are paying and unprecedented amount of attention, it's not at all improbable that CountMore could help some of those young voters make a more informed choice about how most effectively to wield their vote on November 4th.

Mich. GOP Targets Foreclosure Victims for Election Day Dirty Tricks

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

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

By Erin Ferns

Partisan political operatives in Michigan are taking voter caging operations to depths that would surprise even the most cynical observers of American elections. If their plans are put into action, thousands of Michigan foreclosure victims may find that they will not only have lost their homes this year, but also their vote.

Operatives in the closely contested state, which is home to thousands of homeowners facing foreclosure, are “gearing up for a comprehensive voter challenge campaign,” according to Eartha Jane Melzer of the Michigan Messenger Wednesday. The state allows parties to send election challengers to polls to challenge the eligibility of voters if they “have good reason to believe” a voter is ineligible. In this case, the GOP of Macomb County—a “key swing county” with a foreclosure rate in the top three percent in the nation—has announced plans to challenge the voting eligibility of foreclosure victims based on residency.

“We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses,” Macomb County GOP chairman James Carabelli told the Messenger.

J. Gerald Herbert, a former voting rights litigator for the U.S. Justice Department, questions what he calls a “mean-spirited” and possibly legally-baseless tactic: “You can't challenge people without a factual basis for doing so...I don't think a foreclosure notice is sufficient basis for a challenge, because people often remain in their homes after foreclosure begins and sometimes are able to negotiate and refinance.”

Teresa James, attorney for Project Vote, agrees. In a statement released today, James explains that Michigan law allows challenges at the polls only if the challenger “knows or has good reason to suspect” a voter is ineligible. According to James, the Michigan Secretary of State has clarified this to require that challenges should be based on “reliable sources or means.”

“Republican challengers with only a list of foreclosure notices will have NO evidence or reliable source to suggest that eligible voters have moved and are no longer eligible to vote,” says James.

“The Macomb County party's plans to challenge voters who have defaulted on their house payments is likely to disproportionately affect African-Americans who are overwhelmingly Democratic voters,” Melzer writes. “More than 60 percent of all sub-prime loans – the most likely kind of loan to go into default – were made to African-Americans in Michigan...”

Melzer points out that Republican presidential candidate John McCain's regional headquarters is in the office of the state's largest foreclosure law firm, Trott & Trott, whose founder has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for the campaign. McCain “stands to benefit from the burgeoning number of foreclosures in the state,” Melzer writes.

“At a minimum, what you are seeing is a fairly comprehensive effort by the Republican Party, a systemic broad-based effort to put up obstacles for people to vote,” says Herbert. “When you are comprehensively challenging people to vote, your goals are two-fold: One is you are trying to knock people out from casting ballots; the other is to create a slowdown that will discourage others.” This type of disruption would be expected in areas with high foreclosure rates, particularly the Detroit metropolitan, where one in every 176 households received foreclosure filings during the month of July, according to Melzer.

“You would think [the Macomb GOP] would think, 'This is going to look too heartless,'” says David Lagstein, head organizer for Michigan ACORN, which has registered 200,000 new voters statewide and provides foreclosure-avoidance assistance.

“The Republican-led state Senate has not moved on the anti-predatory lending bill for over a year and yet have time to prey on those who have fallen victim to foreclosure to suppress the vote,” Lagstein says.

Michigan is not the only swing state at the risk of voter caging issues this election. At the urging of Project Vote and other voting rights advocates, Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner recently issued a binding directive to all county election boards, instructing them that parts of the state's challenge laws in relation to residency challenges based only on returned mail were unconstitutional. It is unclear, however, whether Brunner’s directive will prevent partisans from filing frivolous challenges anyway, which—however baseless—could have a chilling effect on voter turnout. And the Michigan Messenger reports that Franklin County, Ohio director of elections Doug Preisse and the chair of the local GOP have said they do not rule out challenging voters before the election due to foreclosure-related address issues.

In Project Vote’s statement, Teresa James says “The GOP’s plan is a cynical partisan attempt to suppress the vote of thousands of low-income and African-American voters, a replay of the 2004 threats of mass challenges...In America you get to vote even if you’re behind on your bills. All Americans—particularly those members of the community hit hardest by the economic crisis—deserve a voice and a vote on Election Day.”

Quick Links:

“Voter Caging.” Project Vote.

James, Teresa. “Caging Democracy: A 50-Year History of Partisan Challenges to Minority Voters.” Project Vote. September 2007.

In Other News:

'No-Match, No-Vote' Law Draws Criticism - Associated Press
TALLAHASSEE - Advocacy groups predicted Wednesday that thousands of people, mostly the poor and minorities, will be denied the right to vote through no fault of their own under a new Florida voter registration law.

Can young people actually make a difference this year? - Slate
In 2004, the "youth vote" was supposed to break all records. It did and it didn't-but either way, it didn't make a difference for John Kerry, even though he won 54 percent of voters under 29. So it is with this year's youth vote: Even if it exceeds that of four years ago-Barack Obama currently commands about 60 percent of the under-29 cohort-it will be nearly impossible to say whether it made a difference.

ACLU launches campaign to get former prisoners to register to vote – Binghamton Press & Sun-Bulletin [N.Y.]
ALBANY -- The New York Civil Liberties Union today kicked off a six-week campaign to educate county election boards and former prisoners on the voting rights of convicted felons.


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

Meet the New Swing States (Not Necessarily the Same As the Old)

At The Washington Post, Chris Cillizza takes a look at the new top ten swing states. This idea of a "swing state" is a little dated, especially since the Democrats adopted the "50 State Strategy" and saw positive results in 2006. But at the end of the day, even if we do compete in all states, a few will be more competitive than others, and it is inevitable that these states will receive an inordinate amount of attention from the media, the campaigns, and 527 organizations looking to influence the outcome.

That said, here are your new swing states. Learn them well.

2008 Swing States

This looks somewhat familiar. Remember this from November 2004? These are the states where John Kerry would have won the election if only voters under 30 had cast their ballots:

Map

I can't prove any direct connection or major demographic shift in these states at this point, but it definitely bears more looking into. It's also nice to see some states with active youth organizing making the list of "new" swing states (Colorado, Virginia, New Mexico).

Syndicate content