Voter suppression tactics all too common
In my last post, I responded to Stefan Sharkansky, who is the lead writer for unsoundpolitics, the other side's biggest blog in the Northwest.
Stefan & Co. saw their traffic explode with their coverage of the state's gubernatorial election that dragged on and on, and was eventually contested by Republicans.
Since Christine Gregoire was declared the winner of the election (and probably even before then) the elections process has been of the most posted about topics on unsoundpolitics.
Granted, if your candidate loses a close election - make that a very close election - you might want to take a look at the process, too. But the folks at unsoundpolitics haven't tried to fairly scrutizine the process. They've attacked it, ridiculed it, laughed at it, condemned it, and attempted to characterize it as fraudulent.
Many on the other side have pointed fingers at Democrats and accused them of cheating and committing fraud to get Gregoire elected.
Of course, it's worth keeping in mind that all of their allegations of fraud and ballot stuffing were dismissed with prejudice in a court of law.
I'd like to turn the spotlight on another issue related to voting and the elections process: voter suppression.
I had vaguely heard about the problem of voter suppression before, but one of yesterday's PLAN panelists had a speech that jolted me and brought the problem to my full attention.
There have been concerted efforts locally around this country on the part of partisan Republicans who want to stop voters from participating in the process by tricking them, lying to them, and cheating them out of their vote.
Voter suppression is essentially any kind of scheme to prevent one or more (usually, it's more) eligible voters from casting the vote they are rightfully entitled to cast in an election.
We'd like to think that America is a model democratic system, but it isn't. Here, in the United States, there are people who will sink to any level to win...including trying to trick their fellow citizens out of their voting rights.
To give you an idea of some of the tactics of voter suppression, here's a report from the Center for Policy Alternatives:
Millions of Americans are discouraged or prevented from exercising their right to vote because of voter intimidation or suppression, or because of mistakes by election officials.
The 2000 presidential race exposed serious flaws in our nation’s election system. In the aftermath of that campaign, a series of studies found that as many as four million registered voters who wanted to vote were turned away or discouraged from voting. (1)
Even though some of the Election 2000 concerns have been fixed, widespread problems were reported in 2004. For example, just one of the volunteer election protection hotlines handled 125,000 calls in the fall of 2004—75,000 of them on Election Day. (2)
Voter intimidation tactics are employed across the nation.
Almost 40 years after enactment of the historic Voting Rights Act, many Americans are still subjected to threats and intimidation when they try to exercise their right to vote. For example:
More widespread than outright intimidation is the use of tricks designed to fool Americans into staying home on Election Day. For example:
But most violators are never punished because federal prosecutors are unable, or unwilling, to pursue these cases. Further, while federal law applies to intimidation, it does not prohibit willfully fraudulent voter suppression tactics. Federal law also does nothing to prevent mistakes by election officials.
End report excerpt. Click here to see the full report and endnotes for the above numbered sources.
If you were reading carefully above, you might have noted that most of the examples of voter suppression were in Pennsylvania, Florida, and Ohio - the three big "battleground" states of 2004.
What does this signify? That some Republicans worked especially hard in competitive states to cheat and trick voters who were likely to vote Democratic out of casting their ballot.
Voter suppression and intimidation is outrageous and disgraceful. It is completely unacceptable that these kinds of activities could be going on in America.
The reaction at yesterday's PLAN kickoff was similar: legislators and attendees were shaking their heads and murmuring their disgust as the stories were read. Many laughed sadly when they heard about the particular story from Pennsylvania about Democrats being told to vote on Wednesday, November 3rd.
Once again, it shows some people will sink to any level to win. We need to mount a huge effort to fight back against voter intimidation and suppression. The Center for Policy Alternatives itself has a suggestion:
A "Voter Protection Act" for Washington State should be high on the list of meaningful reforms. If voter suppression can happen in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, or Ohio, it can happen anywhere, and it can happen here.
It'll be one of the major policy changes NPI advocates for in the years to come, until it becomes law.
Stefan & Co. saw their traffic explode with their coverage of the state's gubernatorial election that dragged on and on, and was eventually contested by Republicans.
Since Christine Gregoire was declared the winner of the election (and probably even before then) the elections process has been of the most posted about topics on unsoundpolitics.
Granted, if your candidate loses a close election - make that a very close election - you might want to take a look at the process, too. But the folks at unsoundpolitics haven't tried to fairly scrutizine the process. They've attacked it, ridiculed it, laughed at it, condemned it, and attempted to characterize it as fraudulent.
Many on the other side have pointed fingers at Democrats and accused them of cheating and committing fraud to get Gregoire elected.
Of course, it's worth keeping in mind that all of their allegations of fraud and ballot stuffing were dismissed with prejudice in a court of law.
I'd like to turn the spotlight on another issue related to voting and the elections process: voter suppression.
I had vaguely heard about the problem of voter suppression before, but one of yesterday's PLAN panelists had a speech that jolted me and brought the problem to my full attention.
There have been concerted efforts locally around this country on the part of partisan Republicans who want to stop voters from participating in the process by tricking them, lying to them, and cheating them out of their vote.
Voter suppression is essentially any kind of scheme to prevent one or more (usually, it's more) eligible voters from casting the vote they are rightfully entitled to cast in an election.
We'd like to think that America is a model democratic system, but it isn't. Here, in the United States, there are people who will sink to any level to win...including trying to trick their fellow citizens out of their voting rights.
To give you an idea of some of the tactics of voter suppression, here's a report from the Center for Policy Alternatives:
Millions of Americans are discouraged or prevented from exercising their right to vote because of voter intimidation or suppression, or because of mistakes by election officials.
The 2000 presidential race exposed serious flaws in our nation’s election system. In the aftermath of that campaign, a series of studies found that as many as four million registered voters who wanted to vote were turned away or discouraged from voting. (1)
Even though some of the Election 2000 concerns have been fixed, widespread problems were reported in 2004. For example, just one of the volunteer election protection hotlines handled 125,000 calls in the fall of 2004—75,000 of them on Election Day. (2)
Voter intimidation tactics are employed across the nation.
Almost 40 years after enactment of the historic Voting Rights Act, many Americans are still subjected to threats and intimidation when they try to exercise their right to vote. For example:
- In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, flyers were circulated under the banner “Milwaukee Black Voters League” which warned that: anyone who had voted earlier in the year was ineligible to vote in the presidential election; residents who had been convicted of any offense, as well as their families, were ineligible to vote; violation could result in ten years imprisonment and the voters’ children would be taken away. (3)
- In Columbia, South Carolina, a fake letter purportedly from the NAACP threatened that voters with any outstanding parking tickets or unpaid child support would be arrested. (4)
- In Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, voters in African-American communities were systematically challenged by men carrying clipboards, driving a fleet of some 300 sedans with magnetic signs designed to look like law enforcement insignia. (5)
More widespread than outright intimidation is the use of tricks designed to fool Americans into staying home on Election Day. For example:
- In Lake County, Ohio, a fake letter appearing to come from the Lake County Board of Elections was sent to newly-registered voters saying that voter registrations gathered by Democratic campaigns or the NAACP were illegal and those voters would not be allowed to vote. (6)
- In Orlando, Florida, a first-time voter received a visit from a woman with a clipboard asking how she was going to vote. When the voter said she preferred Kerry, the visitor told the voter she didn’t need to go to the polls because her vote had been recorded on the clipboard. This same tactic was repeated across Florida. (7)
- In Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, a flyer designed to look like an official announcement from McCandless Township said that, because of the expected “immense voter turnout,” the election would be conducted over two days and that the county was requesting Republicans to vote on November 2, while Democrats should vote on November 3. (8)
- In Franklin County, Ohio, phone callers claiming to be from the Board of Elections falsely informed voters that their precincts had changed, and that elections officials would come pick up any absentee ballots from their homes. (9)
But most violators are never punished because federal prosecutors are unable, or unwilling, to pursue these cases. Further, while federal law applies to intimidation, it does not prohibit willfully fraudulent voter suppression tactics. Federal law also does nothing to prevent mistakes by election officials.
End report excerpt. Click here to see the full report and endnotes for the above numbered sources.
If you were reading carefully above, you might have noted that most of the examples of voter suppression were in Pennsylvania, Florida, and Ohio - the three big "battleground" states of 2004.
What does this signify? That some Republicans worked especially hard in competitive states to cheat and trick voters who were likely to vote Democratic out of casting their ballot.
Voter suppression and intimidation is outrageous and disgraceful. It is completely unacceptable that these kinds of activities could be going on in America.
The reaction at yesterday's PLAN kickoff was similar: legislators and attendees were shaking their heads and murmuring their disgust as the stories were read. Many laughed sadly when they heard about the particular story from Pennsylvania about Democrats being told to vote on Wednesday, November 3rd.
Once again, it shows some people will sink to any level to win. We need to mount a huge effort to fight back against voter intimidation and suppression. The Center for Policy Alternatives itself has a suggestion:
States can adopt the Voter Protection Act.We know that we need election process reform in Washington - we need to move the date of the primary so it isn't in September and pass other meaningful reforms.
The Voter Protection Act combines the best practices of laws in California, Connecticut and Illinois. It employs three avenues to ensure that every eligible voter is allowed to vote:
- Penalties for intimidation and suppression — Heavy penalties would be imposed for both voter intimidation and suppression. Most states currently prohibit voter intimidation but not fraudulent suppression. Many state voter intimidation laws also have inadequate penalties.
- Voter’s Bill of Rights — Posting of a Voter’s Bill of Rights would be required at every polling place. Six states (CA, CT, FL, IN, MN, NV) currently have a Voter’s Bill of Rights.
- Election Day manual — A book clearly setting out election rules would be available for both voters and officials at the polls. Illinois requires an election manual.
A "Voter Protection Act" for Washington State should be high on the list of meaningful reforms. If voter suppression can happen in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, or Ohio, it can happen anywhere, and it can happen here.
It'll be one of the major policy changes NPI advocates for in the years to come, until it becomes law.
