As of this week, Oregon has a new system for registering voters. Under the law signed on Monday, March 16, Oregon citizens are automatically placed on the voter registration roll if they have had an interaction with the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles since 2013.

The new law  is designed to make registering to vote easier, as opposed to erecting barriers to registration, which has become a politically motivated strategy elsewhere—mostly in states with Republican Governors and/or Republican-controlled legislatures.

What’s shocking is to realize that the new Oregon law is the first of its kind in the U.S.

Oregon’s Governor, Kate Brown, made streamlined voter registration a key plank in her campaign platform. She had previously pushed for automatic motor-voter registration as Oregon’s Secretary of State.

When she signed the bill, Brown said,

During the testimony on the bill, a legislator said to me, ‘It’s already so easy to register — why would we make it easier?’ My answer is that we have the tools to make voter registration more cost-effective, more secure and more convenient for Oregonians, so why wouldn’t we?

Oregon’s new law turns conventional voter registration on its head: Traditionally, citizens have had to seek out voter registration—opting in by going to an election board, signing a voter registration card, or, more recently, registering on-line. Under Oregon’s new procedure, registration is de facto. If a citizen does not want to be registered, he or she can opt out.

According to the Washington Post,

Oregon estimates the bill will add 300,000 new voters to its rolls. According to the state DMV, there are 876,086 more drivers with licenses in the state than registered voters, however, not all of those drivers may be eligible and some may opt out of being registered. Adding 300,000 voters to its rolls would increase the percentage of eligible voters who are registered to 83 percent.

But will having more registered voters increase actual turnout on election day? That remains to be seen. In the meantime, kudos to Oregon for another forward-thinking, democracy-promoting breakthrough.

The post Oregon’s new voter registration law: This is what democracy really looks like appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Republican Secretaries of State in Kansas and Arizona are devising a whole new way to make voting harder. Thwarted by the U.S. Supreme Court in their attempt to require proof of citizenship for voter registration, they are working on a plan to create an unprecedented system of two classes of voters: those who qualify—under new rules—to vote in federal elections only, and those who qualify to vote in state elections as well as federal elections.

Some background, from Talking Points Memo:

In both states, the preparations underway are reactions to the Supreme Court’s June ruling in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council, the legal battle over Arizona’s 2004 voter identification law, known as Proposition 200. While the headlines in June painted the ruling as a blow to Proposition 200, officials in both Arizona and Kansas have chosen to focus on the leeway the Supreme Court left them. Kansas State Election Director Brad Bryant laid out the argument in an email he sent to county election officers at the end of July.

“As the Supreme Court made clear, its decision applies only to ‘federal registration forms’ and covers only federal elections,” Bryant wrote, according to a copy of the email provided to TPM. “States remain free to require proof of citizenship from voters who seek to also vote in state elections.”

Here’s how it works: When potential voters register using the standard federal voter registration form, they are asked only to indicate, by their signature, that they are citizens of the U.S. and therefore qualified to vote. But in addition to the standardized voter registration provided to all states by the federal government, there’s also a form, in almost all states, that is customized to that state. Kansas’ Secretary of State is now saying there’s a loophole in the Supreme Court decision that leaves a window of opportunity to require proof of citizenship on the state registration form.

So, Kansas is going to add that stipulation to its voter registration form. By this logic, that means that there will be two classes of voters: Tier 1 will be who have registered via the federal form—with no documentary proof of citizenship. In Kansas, those voters will be allowed to vote only on federal offices, not on state and local elections. Tier 2 voters, who have registered via the state form—providing the required proof of citizenship—will be allowed to vote in both state and federal elections.

Of course, it’s an “end-around” play, designed to circumvent the Supreme Court’s ruling and to suppress the votes of people who they’d like to keep from voting—effectively people who don’t have the necessary documents [or the time/money to go and get them], which generally means minorities, poor people and older people—who tend to vote for Democrats.

This ploy is also another sorry, scary and democracy-killing example of states asserting their rights versus the federal government—not for reasons of fairness or opportunity, but as a cynical and nihilistic way of manipulating elections. Sadly, it’s part of a trend: We’ve also seen state legislatures attempting to nullify federal gun laws, and make implementation of the Affordable Care Act [Obamacare] illegal in their states.

Creating separate and unequal “tiers” of voting is a sickening idea that has the potential to become a terrible trend. At long last, have they no decency?

The post Voting rights watch: KS and AZ have scary plans for “two-tier” voting appeared first on Occasional Planet.

The deadline for voter registration has come and gone in my state. But the memories linger on. Carrying a clipboard stocked with the 19^th-century voter registration cards we use in Missouri, and fully equipped with the sense that registering to vote—whether Democrat or Republican—is a beneficial activity,  I’ve been out there talking to people.

[Sidebar: A Republican acquaintance of mine, when told what I’d been up to, and knowing that I’m an Obama supporter, thought he was being clever when he winked and said, “I guess you’ve been doing that in East St. Louis, right?” Around here, that’s code for African-American neighborhoods, and I don’t find racist humor at all amusing.]

So, if I’m looking for lessons learned from my voter registration activities this year, that might be the first one: We most certainly do not live in a post-racist America.

Here are a few more. They’re less galling, more nitty-gritty, and, particularly in one instance, actually inspiring:

1.

Despite Americas low voter turnout rate, being a registered voter still has cache. What makes me think that?  Because I’ve observed that people do not want to admit that they are not registered, and that is why, when I walk around with a voter registration clipboard, I’ve learned not to ask, “Are you registered to vote?” Instead, I try to remember to ask them if their voter registration matches their current address, or if they’ve moved since the last time they voted. [I can usually get a laugh if I add to that list, “Or have you entered the witness protection program?”

2.

Once you have moved, it can be hard to remember your previous address. Often, when a person is filling out a change of address for voter registration, he/she has to think hard about the old address. Lesson learned:  We Americans don’t just move. We move on.

3.

People who are ineligible to vote are very well informed about their status.  Non-citizens.  Too young (but often looking, to these aging eyes, much older).  People with a felony conviction. In that instance, the legal system is, apparently doing an excellent job of informing people that they can’t vote .In my state, people with felonies can re-register when they are “off paper,” meaning when they have completed parole. On that point, they seem not as well informed.  (Suggestion: On that auspicious day when you get off papers, parole officers—or  somebody—should  welcome people back into democracy, inform them of their restored civil rights, and perhaps even hand them a voter registration card.)

4.

Too many people, even when offered the chance to register right then and there, decline, for reasons that work directly against their own self interest. I’ve heard a lot of these reasons, and i am certain that others manning the front lines of voter reg can cite many more:”My vote doesn’t count.” Right. Tell that to Missouri State Representative Stacey Newman, who won her primary election by precisely one vote.”The winner is destined to win, and nothing we do can change that.”And here’s my favorite from my most recent go-round:  “I take my voting advice from Homer Simpson. Homer says, “I  feel like a real American when i don’t vote.” (Homer has a point. A satirical point. Not a serious point, sir.)

5.

And, if you think it is hard to persuade an undecided voter, try convincing an apathetic or uninformed eligible citizen simply to register.  One young man told me that he doesn’t vote because it doesn’t matter. (I asked, by the way, and his non-voting was not based on religious beliefs.)  Pressing him a bit I noted that he was just coming from a doctor’s appointment at a federally funded clinic, and I was wondering how that was working for him. “It’s good,” he said. “I really need my Medicaid.” “Hmm. maybe you should vote,” I replied. “If you want Medicaid, you need to vote for people who want to keep it and give it government money.” “Nah,” came the answer. “I just don’t vote.”

The best and most effective argument for registering to vote that I heard this year came from another volunteer. Trying to persuade a man who was very reluctant to register, she told him her story:  “I grew up in South Carolina, where my parents couldn’t vote, had to sit in the back of the bus and drink from the ‘Coloreds Only’ fountain,” she said.  “Then, in 1965, with the stroke of a pen, we got the Voting Rights Act, and everything changed. And I want you to realize that, with another stroke of another pen, that could all go away again. And that’s why you need to register and then vote.”The young man said he’d think about it, but he walked away. And then, one hour later, he came back and registered to vote for the first time in his life.

And that’s why I’m keeping my clipboard.

The post Lessons learned by a clipboard-carrying, voter registration volunteer appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Proving that President Obama is still a trend starter, after his speech at the Democratic National Convention, online searches for registering to vote doubled across America. His excellent speech which ended with the following statement:

“I ask you tonight for your vote….

If you reject the notion that this nation’s promise is reserved for the few, your voice must be heard in this election.

If you reject the notion that our government is forever beholden to the highest bidder, you need to stand up in this election.

If you believe that new plants and factories can dot our landscape, that new energy can power our future, that new schools can provide ladders of opportunity to this nation of dreamers, if you believe in a country where everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share and everyone plays by the same rules, then I need you to vote this November.”

It must have struck a chord with people. As MSNBC and Google’s twitter feed report, at 11:03 Google searches for voter registration info surged. (Google isn’t great at sharing specific numbers but they do offer interesting graphs and charts on what’s trending at any given time.)

Another interesting thing to note is that between both the Republican and Democratic National Conventions, the Democratic speakers were more commonly Googled.

The post Google searches on “register to vote” go crazy after Obama speech appeared first on Occasional Planet.

If you want to register to vote in Arizona, you’d better bring along proof of citizenship. If you’d like to register in Nevada, make sure that your name, address and Social Security number exactly match—letter for letter, including middle initials—the information in the state’s other databases.

These highly restrictive rules make voting more difficult than it should be, and they exemplify the kinds of obstacles revealed in “Voting in 2010: 10 Swing States,” a report released on Sept. 17 by Demos and Common Cause. The report examines both obstacles to voting and exemplary practices in 10 states with hotly contested races in November.

The stakes are high

The report explains it this way:

The U.S. Senate and House of Representatives will be close in 2010. Potentially, party control of the Senate and House hangs in the balance; gubernatorial races will also be critical, with redistricting to begin shortly after the elections. These dynamics set the stage for election time mischief and attempts at suppression and manipulation of registration and voting rules, especially in close contests where a handful of votes could tip the balance. In other words, the laws and policies governing voting have the potential to be game changing.

State by state

All of the featured states have problems, according to the report’s standards. A few, however, manage to get kudos for innovations and compliance with the National Voting Registration Act [NVRA] passed in 1993. Here’s an abbreviated rundown—culled from the report’s executive summary—of some of the highs and lows, one swing state at a time.

Arizonais the only state that requires proof of citizenship for voter registration. “This law was written and designed to have a disproportionate impact on naturalized citizens seeking to vote,” says the report. “It has already prevented thousands of Arizonans from registering, and acts as a deterrent to…other eligible voters.” Arizona also permanently disenfranchises individuals with more than one felony conviction, but allows people with only one felony conviction to vote, a distinction that confuses even many voting officials.

Colorado does not conduct any formal outreach for immigrant or language-minority voters, despite having more than 404,000 eligible Hispanic voters, 150,000 immigrant citizens and an electorate that is 12.2 percent Latino. The state also lacks any law directly banning dissemination of deceptive information, leaving the state open to the use of phony flyers as well as online dissemination of misinformation meant to disenfranchise voter.

On the plus side, recent changes in Colorado election laws make it easier for voters to register even if their information is not an exact match with other state databases. Also, as of 2010, no voter’s registration can be cancelled solely for failure to vote.

Illinois requires voters who are “challenged” at the polls have to show two forms of ID or have another voter testify to their eligibility. There are no clear guidelines for election officials as to when to allow a “challenged” individual to vote. Making this situation worse is Illinois’ rule that any voter in the state can be a designated challenger.

The good news in Illinois is that voting rights are automatically restored to citizens when they are released from prison. Citizens on parole or probation are eligible to vote.  In Cook County, an exemplary program reaches out to new citizens and people with limited proficiency in English.

Kentucky stands out for its disenfranchisement of people with felony convictions. Under Kentucky law, nearly six percent of Kentucky’s population—and roughly 24 percent of its African American population—cannot vote.  Ex-felons can petition the governor for re-instatement, but this process puts the burden on the petitioner and severely limits real access to voting rights.

To its credit, Kentucky has what the report calls “the most exemplary voter challenge law among the states under reviews.  Only designated challengers and election officials who undergo specific training can challenge others’ right to vote.”

Louisiana has experienced an 88 percent decline in the number of voter registrations obtained through public-assistance agencies since such registration programs were required—one of the steepest drops in the nation.  In addition, Louisiana’s voter-challenger rules are very vague, and its voter-registration deadline is 30 days before the election, making it difficult for new voters to register.  After Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, an election-roll purge program removed 21,000 names from the statewide voter registration lists, when officials compared the names of Louisiana voters with those from other states. [Many names from the New Orleans area were later reinstated, but list maintenance is a problem to be watched, says the report.]

Michigan recently settled a lawsuit over purges to its voter registration database, and agreed to reform its practices.  At issue was a 2008 plan to challenge voters whose homes had been foreclosed. But Michigan is not out of the woods, yet, as challenges and “caging” continue to be potential problems.

The report also notes Michigan’s poor track record in promoting voter registration at state-run public assistance agencies.  In addition, Michigan lacks a law specifically prohibiting deceptive practices, “leaving voters vulnerable to dirty tricks and misinformation campaigns.” The state’s 30-days-in-advance registration deadline is also seen as a negative by the report.

In the plus column, Michigan restores voting rights as soon as citizens are released from prison, and the Secretary of State’s office makes a serious effort to make voter registration available at citizenship naturalization ceremonies.

Missouri voters who do not bring the right ID to the polls on election day are barred from voting and can’t get a provisional ballot.  Also in Missouri, anyone can challenge another voter’s eligibility, and voters who cast provisional ballots in the wrong precinct will have their votes disqualified. In addition, Missouri does not allow individuals who are on probation or parole for a felony to vote.

The good news is that Missouri is the only state that has a law very directly addressing deceptive practices.

Nevada uses an exact-match standard on voter registration databases, a procedure that can make it hard for some voters to cast a ballot. And despite the presence of 192,000 eligible Hispanic voters, the state has made no effort to reach out to encourage voter registration.  Its voter ID laws, however, are considered exemplary.

North Carolina  is a good place to be a voter, says the report.  Voters can register right up until the end of the early voting period, which ends on the Saturday before the election. Plus, the state has a very strong law prohibiting misinformation campaigns designed to confuse voters.

But the state gets lower grades for its challenge laws, which allow any registered voter to challenge the eligibility of a voter before the 25^th day before an election. On election day, any individual registered voter can challenge anyone else at his or her precinct.  Also, voting rights for citizens who have finished a prison sentence are not restored until after they have completed parole or probation.

Ohio is among the states with very early voter registration deadlines—in this case, it’s 30 days before the election.

Its voter database has had chronic matching problems. In addition, Ohio has been an epicenter for misinformation campaigns conducted via email spam and robocalls, but the state has not enacted statutes to prevent these practices.

To its credit, Ohio allows citizens who have finished their prison sentences to vote, and the report calls the state “exemplary” in its voter-registration outreach to newly naturalized citizens.

What’s the takeaway from this report?

While federal laws are in place to make voting more accessible and fair–and have been for quite a few years–an  individual voter’s experience still varies greatly, depending on where you live. I am continually amazed and disheartened by states’ intransigence and unwillingness to enforce federal statutes for political reasons. In my mind, the disparities are further evidence of the problems with leaving decisions regarding democracy and fairness to the vagaries and whims of states and their politicians.

em

The post Bad, good, ugly: Rules for voting in 10 swing states appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Dismally low voter turnout among eligible citizens between the ages of 18 and 24 is a perpetual cause for despair. The numbers are particularly disturbing, say voting-rights organizations, “because people under 30 constitute the most progressive generation in memory. So, it stands to reason that encouraging younger voters to become politically active is a major part of advancing progressive reform.”

One solution is to engage youthful voters early,by giving them a path to voting and by eliminating obstacles–such as  citizen inertia–to registration. And by “early,” election-reform advocates mean 16.

FairVote, a non-profit that bills itself as “the center for voting and democracy,” proposes that:

states establish a uniform initial voter registration age of no older than 16. These advance-registered voters would be automatically added to the voting rolls when they reach voting age. Ideally, they would also be sent information about the mechanics of voting and the timing of the first election for which they are eligible. Evidence collected from different states suggests this change will usually have no fiscal impact.

Fair Vote’s website includes a fact sheet explaining the rationale for youth pre-registration:

• A significant disparity exists between the percentage of young people registered to vote and the percentage of the general population.
  • 71% of eligible voters are registered; 59% of eligible voters age 18-24 are registered

• A uniform voter registration age often does not exist.
  • In some states, all 17-year-olds and some 16-year-olds can register. In other states, some 17-year-olds and no 16-year-olds can register. In many states it changes year to year based on the date of the next election.
  • The lack of uniformity creates confusion and makes it harder to run effective voter registration and education programs in schools and at the Division of Motor Vehicles.

• A uniform advance-registration age does not require a new registration database system.
  • In many states, advance-registered voters already are inputted into the voter registration database as “pending.” A State’s Board of Elections transfers “pending” voters to “active” status when they become eligible to vote.

• Lowering the advance-registration age does NOT change the voting age.
  • The 26th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution sets the voting age at 18-years-old.
  • Local and state jurisdictions can lower the voting age if they so choose, but it is a separate question from voter registration.

• Why is 16-years-old a sensible age for advance-registration?
  • When applying for a driver’s license, a 16-year-old can register to vote at the DMV.
  • 16-years-old is the compulsory school attendance age in most states.
  • Many states already allow 16-year-olds to register during parts of the election cycle.

• Why aren’t the current registration programs in high schools good enough?
  • Registration drives typically do not focus on anyone other than seniors.
  • Registration drives have much higher registration rates in presidential election years.
  • No statutory requirement for voter registration in schools exists.
  • A standardized voting curriculum would encourage students to learn about the mechanics of participation (i.e. requesting absentee ballots).

• Does registering to vote at a younger age have long-term benefits?
  • Some states have already recognized the importance of early participation by allowing 17-year-olds to serve as full-time election judges.
  • Registration boosts turnout: in 2008, 83% of registered 18-24-year-olds voted.
  • Academic studies and electoral analyses show that voting behavior is habit-forming. If you vote, you will likely keep voting. If you don’t vote, you probably won’t start.

Another rationale for youth pre-registration comes from participation numbers for the 2008 presidential election. According to Progessive States Network:

After two presidential election cycles where we saw steady increases in youth voter participation, 2008 was the year that young voters really roared.  The primary season saw increases in youth voter participation outstrip the large increases in general participation with turnout tripling or even quadrupling among young people in some states. In the general election youth voted at a rate not seen since 1992 and have increased their turnout 11 points since 2000.

To date, five states have implemented a policy enabling pre-registration for voters under the age of 18. They are Maryland, North Carolina, Hawaii, Florida and Rhode Island.

A further step in modernizing the US electoral system would be to have universal voter registration, in which all citizens are automatically registered to vote. More on this idea in a future post…

The post To get young people to vote, let them pre-register at 16 appeared first on Occasional Planet.