It has been very disconcerting to watch voting rights erode in America over the past 30 years or so. For those of us na\u00efve enough to think that the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the 19th Amendment, and the 1965 Voting Rights Act settled the thor<\/a>niest issues around voting rights\u2014we have been forced to rethink our assumptions.<\/p>\n The term \u201cerosion\u201d is not really accurate, though. Eroding seems too passive a verb for what has been happening: the deliberate attempt, by politically motivated legislatures, to shrink voting rights for people whose votes they\u2019d rather not count.<\/p>\n I seem to remember from my 8th grade Civics class that the history of voting rights in America has, traditionally, been one of expansion. The reversal of that trend, via radical, anti-democracy, anti-voting policies initiated primarily by right-wing Republicans, is a shameful blot on a country that claims to be a democracy [“the greatest democracy in the world!”]<\/p>\n So, I feel encouraged by some recent developments that may indicate the beginning of a pendulum swing back in the appropriate direction. Here are a few, in no particular order:<\/p>\n Automatic voter registration<\/strong> Further along this spectrum is Oregon, whose state legislature passed a bill in March 2015<\/a> putting that idea into practice.<\/p>\n According to the Brennan Center,<\/p>\n …the new law automatically registers eligible citizens who have driver\u2019s licenses (and do not ask to remain unregistered). While there had been strong and bipartisan efforts across a majority of states to modernize voter registration, Oregon\u2019s law went a step further, giving government the primary responsibility for ensuring that every eligible citizen is registered.<\/p>\n Soon after Oregon\u2019s bill was signed into law, legislators in 17 states plus the District of Columbia and the United States Congress introduced similar bills that would automatically register citizens who interact with motor vehicle offices and ensure that voter information is electronically and securely sent to the voter rolls.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The Brennan Center estimates that the new procedure in Oregon will immediately add 300,000 citizens to the voting rolls.<\/p>\n Making Election Day a national holida<\/strong>y<\/p>\n It has been clear for many years that the first-Tuesday-in-November Election Day schedule is out of sync with contemporary life. Many states have found ways to adapt, mostly by offering early voting days and extended voting hours [both of which have been under attack in the 21st century]. But, because most voting still takes place on a single day, during slightly extended business hours, it\u2019s hard for people to get to the polls, let alone wait in long lines for their turn. It\u2019s also hard to get people to work for election authorities\u2014and the most qualified, such as government workers, people accustomed to checking numbers, workers comfortable with electronic equipment, etc., are otherwise occupied with their day jobs.<\/p>\n Recognizing this disconnect in the most essential activity of a democracy, Bernie Sanders recently introduced a bill into the U.S. Senate to declare presidential Election Day a national, public holiday<\/a>, making it more convenient for more people to vote, as well as to do the vital work of ensuring fairness and accountability at the polls.<\/p>\n Sanders is realistic in his expectations: Making Election Day a national holiday won\u2019t cure Americans of their embarrassing indifference to voting, but it would make an important statement about a fundamental element of the American democratic system.<\/p>\n In introducing the bill, Sanders said:<\/p>\n We should be doing everything possible to make it easier for people to participate in the political process. Election Day should be a national holiday so that everyone has the time and opportunity to vote. While this would not be a cure-all, it would indicate a national commitment to create a vibrant democracy.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Reversing punitive voter ID requirements<\/strong><\/p>\n In a decision that gives hope to those of us who see voting as a right, rather than a privilege, the 5th Circuit Court recently struck down Texas\u2019 highly restrictive voter ID law<\/a>. According to the Brennan Center for Democracy, the Texas law discriminated against blacks and Hispanics and violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965.<\/p>\n The Texas ID law is one of the strictest of its kind in the country. It requires voters to bring a government-issued photo ID to the polls. Accepted forms of identification include a driver\u2019s license, a United States passport, a concealed-handgun license and an election identification certificate issued by the State Department of Public Safety.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n [Note that, under Texas law, you could use, as proof of identity, your concealed-carry handgun license, but not your state-issued student ID, your voter registration card, or your utility bill.]<\/p>\n
\nOn the campaign trail, Democrats Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders<\/a> have both called for automatic voter registration for everyone at age 18. Voting rights advocates [wait, why is voting-rights advocacy even necessary?] note that these declarations represent a breakthrough, as voting reform has been absent as a front-and-center issue in presidential campaigns for at least 50 years.<\/p>\n