Election Day Registration

Bumped. --Mike

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

Weekly Voting Rights News Update

By Erin Ferns

Reports and exits polls this entire political season have built a narrative of tremendous, even record-breaking voter participation, pushing us to believe that voter turnout in November will exceed all expectations.

Maybe.

The dirty secret of elections in America is that getting on the rolls, casting a ballot, and having that ballot counted is a complicated system adjudicated and carried out by more than 3,000 counties and towns and regulated by a complex mix of state and federal laws. In order for the expected record-shattering turnout to occur in November, all aspects of the system, from registration procedures to polling place systems to ballot counting procedures all need to work properly. However, those with an interest in suppressing turnout may disrupt the process at any one of those points. The biggest impact comes by preventing people from making it onto the voting rolls in the first place since no one can cast a ballot without being registered.

Unsurprisingly, politicians with partisan interests at heart are pushing states to raise barriers to the democratic process by enforcing laws that restrict voter registration drives and violate the Voting Rights Act. These election-related policies have disproportionately negative impact on young people and minorities – two groups that have historically suffered underrepresentation in the electorate. However, in an encouraging move aimed at lowering these kinds of barriers, the Massachusetts Senate passed a bill that would help enfranchise all voters on Election Day.

Restrictions on Voter Registration Drives
During presidential election years, efforts to register more citizens increase dramatically. However, several states impose various restrictions on voter registration drives, which in turn has a disproportionate impact upon youth and people with disabilities – two communities that commonly register to vote through such drives, according to Ben Adler of the Politico.

The swing state of New Mexico is under the most scrutiny for their drive policy and has recently been sued for unconstitutionally hindering the right to collect voter registrations under a 2005 election reform law.

“The activists contend that because the law creates criminal penalties for failing to meet its requirements – which even supporters acknowledge are stringent – it discourages groups from collecting registrations,” Adler wrote. New Mexico's excessively short 48 hour time frame to turn in a completed application and subsequent misdemeanor charge if the collector is late has reportedly stopped students who “'simply want to get out on campus and register their friends to vote.'” The Federal government recognizes the challenges imposed by short time lines: Under the National Voter Registration Act, state agencies are provided 10 days to turn in new applications.

Violations of the Voting Rights Act
Other voting rights issues that have recently been battled involve violations of the Voting Rights Act.
The U.S. Justice Department recently announced an agreement to protect Latino voters in New Jersey after a complaint was filed involving discrimination in the voting process. Puerto Rican voters in the Penns Grove borough had complained they were subject to racial comments and hostility as well as disproportionately asked for voter ID and turned away at the polls. It was the third lawsuit of this nature this year. The suit also alleged that Spanish-speaking voters were not provided Spanish-language election materials or enough aid from bilingual poll workers, also requirements of the Act. The agreement must still be approved by the court, the Justice Department press release said.

“The right to vote is a fundamental guarantee for all American citizens,” said U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey Christopher Christie. “The Division is committed to vigorously enforcing federal civil rights laws during the important election year and commends the county and borough for promptly and constructively resolving the matter.”

Asian voters in Massachusetts were not as successful in getting the state to provide fully sufficient bilingual ballots, according to a column by Adrian Walker of the Boston Globe. Advocates recently attempted to meet with Secretary of State William Galvin to gain his support for a proposed law requiring ballots be translated into Chinese and Vietnamese. The bill passed the Boston City Council earlier this year, but still requires legislative approval in order to ensure elderly Asian residents with limited English skills are not denied the right to vote in November.

“Voting is as American as apple pie,” said Boston City Councilor Sam Yoon. “This is something everyone should want to protect.”

However, Galvin - who the legislature looks to when considering election law - denied the group, as he has for the last year, according to Walker.

Despite swelling interest and rising registration rates among youth and minorities, there are significant and persistent barriers to their increased participation. The identification of these barriers should serve as a wake-up call in each state, pushing them to take steps to address the barriers and equip themselves to handle the influx of new voters this coming Election Day.

Voter Registration Surge and Election Day Chaos
An example of this swelling interest can be seen in one county in Florida where minority voters are beginning to balance their share of the electorate. This year alone in Lee County, Florida, black and Latino voters have increased by as much as 22 percent – more than double the increase among white voters, according to local publication, Fort Meyers News-Press.

“The increase in minority voter registration gives voice to people who haven't always been represented at the table,” the News-Press editorialized. “Whether it's the presence of a nontraditional candidate, the pressing economic conditions, or the war in Iraq, anything that inspires citizens to participate in the political process is beneficial.”

The unprecedented surge of voters expected to turn out in November could pose a major challenge for states, according to Stateline.org. The online news site, run by the Pew Research Center, raised concerns about poor ballot design and even last minute voter registration drives that could swamp understaffed offices, making it more difficult for voters to get on the rolls, let alone cast a ballot.

“People know it's going to be a historically high turnout. Whether they can do anything about it is another question,” said Dan Seligson of electionline.org, a Pew Center on the States project that provides analysis on election reform.

Smart Election Reform
While other states scramble to figure out how to accommodate the influx of voters and advocates ensure voting rights are protected, one state is pushing one of the most effective measures to expand access to democracy for all American citizens – Election Day Registration. On Tuesday, the Massachusetts Senate passed a bill that would allow voters to register and vote on Election Day. The bill, SB 2807 is currently in the House Ways and Means committee. If passed, Massachusetts would join the ranks of eight other EDR states, which have average turnout rates that exceed non-EDR states by as much as 12 percent. Three other states are considering EDR bills: New Jersey, New York and Ohio. To view these bills, visit www.ElectionLegislation.org.

Update: Down with Tyranny has more on this from Amy Klobuchar, who is a cosponsor of the bill.
----------------------------

In the wake of the Supreme Courts decision in the Indian Photo-ID case, Sen. Russ Feingold is proposing nation-wide election day registration for federal elections.

From the AP:

WASHINGTON -- Minnesota and Wisconsin lawmakers are seeking legislation that would require states to let people register to vote on the same day that a federal election is held.

Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, along with Senator Amy Klobuchar and Congressman Keith Ellison of Minnesota, plan to introduce the bill on Thursday. The lawmakers, all Democrats, say that same-day registration will encourage more people to vote.

The legislation comes three days after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that states can require voters to produce photo identification. Civil rights groups worry that such voter ID laws will deter poor, older and minority voters from casting ballots. Proponents say voter ID laws are needed to prevent fraud.

I don't know what the chance is of this bill even making it out of committee (slim to none, I suspect), but it is a fantastic idea. Young people face too many barriers to voting already. We move a lot (invalidating our registrations), we are inexperienced with the process, local municipalities discourage student voting, and now thanks to the Supreme Court, young voters in Indiana face a number of new bureaucratic hoops through which they must jump before casting their first ballot. Given all that, it's no wonder voter turnout rates are lower among young people and high among seniors who rarely move and have decades of experience with the process.

If we want to see young people turnout in numbers on par with the rest of the electorate, EDR is a great first step. Studies have shown that in EDR states, youth turnout can rise by as much as 14% (pdf). Kudos to Senator Feingold for raising the issue. This is something all youth groups should promote and pursue in the coming months and years.

Today's Daily Dispatch from the Progressive States Network focuses on how states can lower barriers to participation and increase turnout in elections. It's a great resource on election day registration, mail-in registration, and other proven ways that states can increase citizen engagement.

UPDATE: Also... a quick fact from our friend Kat: 18-20 year olds didn't have the right to vote until 1972. So the excerpt ""The Census Bureau’s historical time series shows that the 18-to-24 vote peaked at 50.9 percent in 1964, 50.4 percent in 1968, and 49.6 percent in 1972" is especially funny.

David Hill, a reporter for The Hill and republican pollster, attacked young voters and their enthusiasm today by directly targeting Heather Smith, executive Director of Rock the Vote. His argument is illogical, insubstantial, poorly researched, and dishonest.

Lets begin:

"Campaigners must set aside normative wishes about kids voting and be realistic about the likelihood of that happening. Regrettably, youth vote boosters like Heather induce too many candidates and campaigns to place too much emphasis and hope on that unreliable slice of the electorate. If Barack Obama wants to build his entire campaign on exciting the youth vote, then as a Republican I hope he does exactly that, because it will lead to his defeat. The hard numbers don’t lie."

Heather Smith advocates getting out the vote for young people and encourages candidates to talk to young voters. She does not say that young voters will win a candidate an election or that they should only talk to young voters.

But rather, in a political world where candidates and campaigns do absolutely no communication with young voters, making that contact and building those relationships CAN make or break a campaign.

Hill is right about one thing. Numbers don't lie. Youth outreach in conjunction with other efforts can and has made a difference. See some REAL numbers here, here, here, here, here, and here's a nice fact sheet with date for even more info.

No one in the youth movement is saying or would say that only targeting young people is the way to win an election. In fact I think Jane Flemming has articulated on here before a clarification about that misnomer.

Next:

"but the more compelling number may be that 58.1 percent of the entire 18- to 24-year-old cohort didn’t vote. That doubles non-voting among 65- to 74-year-olds, only 29.2 percent of whom didn’t vote."

Its true. And if you'd expand the numbers to reflect the two voting blocks in a more even way say compare 18-29 year olds vs. 65-77 year olds then you'd be looking at ten years in each voting block. To take folks 18-24 (7 years) and compare it to 65-74 (10 years) disproportionately skews the data to fit his thesis.

What is more substantial is this table here:

Hill can talk about seniors all he wants. Its great that seniors turn out to the polls and work hard to vote. It is, however, significantly easier for them to vote then it is for younger people as today's Dallas Morning News reports:

"Despite the high voter interest, many students also were turned away – for showing up at the wrong precinct, forgetting identification cards and failing to register in time."

First, young people are not as settled as seniors (who often live in the same house they die in). Young people are just starting out, they move around from college, to internships, to new homes, new apartments, school, and other places. With Election Day Registration we can level the playing field and make it easier for young people who are too often disenfranchised.

Secondly, there is an obscene amount of outreach to seniors. In fact, seniors have their own nationally recognized subsidized organization that spends millions on lobbying each year for their specific age block. Young people don't have that. They have Heather Smith and the hundreds of young people working tirelessly for little money all to combat negative articles like David Hill's.

If we passed Election Day Registration in each state and we had even half of the outreach that seniors have 18-29 year olds would run this country. Instead we have little outreach and only 7 states offer EDR. Even with that, we have an overwhelming number of people voting this year with the potential for more.

The rest of the article throws more stats at you that don't make sense because they only look at 18-24 year olds. He finally claims that even at its height

"The Census Bureau’s historical time series shows that the 18-to-24 vote peaked at 50.9 percent in 1964, 50.4 percent in 1968, and 49.6 percent in 1972

By that same token, since in 2004 American turnout peaked at 60% a record turnout for the entire country, that we just shouldn't connect with any of those other voters that are registered because.... they don't matter. Right.... that makes SO much sense.

Amber Goodwin who serves on the DNC Youth Advisory Council, the NAACP Youth and College Branch, the YDA Minority Caucus, and tons of others wrote a letter to the editor that we hope they have the guts to publish in response to Hill's piece. Among the facts and figures, from the the recent primary states, Amber says this:

"Maybe Mr. Hill slept through the results of the caucuses from last night, or somehow misplaced his newspaper that showed the historic youth turnout in out state of Texas. Yes, I get it; the "Obama Factor" is huge. I am now an Obama delegate to the Senate Convention and am proud to support his campaign. One of the reasons that his campaign has been very successful is what youth advocates have been saying for years: campaigns must target young people.

Obama's campaign started from the beginning by actually talking to young people, targeting young people and having conversations with us about our issues, many of which resonate across race, gender, age and even party lines. The 2008 presidential cycle is the first time that we have seen skilled National Youth Directors as integral staff for all of the major Democratic candidates."

We think that perhaps Mr. Hill is just a little Republican pollster that is seeing the numbers and is worried. The fact is that we are making huge waves and both parties are scrambling to understand what is going on and how to capture us. As a result we are in large enough numbers that we impact policies and campaigns by serving as a compliment to existing outreach.

For Hill, supposedly a respected numbers guy, to try and come up with his own numbers and only quote data that doesn't match up is simply bad journalism. I think people are smarter than that.

There are likely four reasons why youth turnout in Iowa and New Hampshire has been so high:

1. Outreach by the campaigns - particularly the Obama campaign
2. Continued outreach by organizations outside the Democratic Party that has been ongoing since 2004.
3. A civic spirit and anger at the current state of the country among Millennials.

The fourth reason, and I think one of the untold stories about both the Iowa Caucuses and the New Hampshire Primary, is that both states practice EDR: Election Day Registration.

Election Day reports of record turnouts saw may precincts running out of ballots and demanding more from the SOS office, particularly in some college towns. The Progressive State Network is already reporting that in at least one precinct, EDR made up 10% of all voters. National studies by Demos and Election Line have shown that states with EDR have significantly higher turnout, and that EDR can be a huge boost to youth participation, increasing turnout by as much as 14% among younger voters. As I've written before, this is already the case in Iowa, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Maine, Montana, Idaho, Wisconsin and Wyoming. And there are active campaigns to implement EDR happening in California, Maryland, Michigan, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon and Vermont. If we're looking to expand the electorate and bring more people - particularly young people - into the political system, expanding EDR to all states is clearly a necessary first step.

This has been, and likely will continue to be, a battleground between those who want greater youth participation - and greater participation overall - and those who don't. Even as Iowa and New Hampshire are showing us the benefits of lowering barriers to participation, conservatives are working to raise more barriers to keep poor, elderly, black, and young people away from the polls. A voter ID law originating in Indiana is currently before the Supreme Court, and it is likely that the Roberts Court will uphold the law. As Steve Rosenfeld notes in a piece on AlterNet, it is laws like these that keep voter turnout rates so low among certain groups - particularly young people and african americans:

The real barrier to student voting in 2008 is not admonitions from the Clintons. It is a patchwork of state laws, according to Rosenfeld, that discourage student voting. Arizona, for instance, rejects out-of-state driver's licenses as an acceptable voter ID. The same is true in Indiana. New Hampshire requires students to register at local government offices. Virginia allows local election officials to decide if a dormitory qualifies as a "domicile." Some do, Rosenfeld said, and some do not. New Mexico restricts the number of voter registration forms one person may carry at a time. And Texas has new penalties for "improperly" helping people with absentee ballots.

Many of these laws -- particularly the voter ID laws and restrictions on registration drives -- have come into effect since the last presidential election. State legislatures, usually with Republican majorities, adopted the measures to combat "voter fraud," or what the GOP has said is people impersonating other voters for partisan benefit. What's notable about these laws is they affect an entire state electorate, while the problems provoking their adoption almost always concern a handful of individuals. That disparity has led many voting rights advocates to say these laws are meant to discourage Democratic voters.

These laws do little to make our elections more secure or reliable. Actual instances of voter fraud of the kind that could be prevented by stricter ID laws is virtually non-existent. All these laws do is limit the size of the electorate to keep certain groups out of the ballot box. I know it's hard to focus on anything other than the election during a Presidential cycle - and for all I know very little chance of implementing new voting laws until after November. But come January 2009, implementing EDR should be one of the primary goals of youth groups - non partisan and partisan alike. Higher turnout is the key to getting more power for young people in our political system.

Conventional wisdom states that low turnout rates are evidence that young people are less engaged than older Americans in civic life.  Yet with high rates of volunteerism and increasing engagement, this is clearly wrong.  Something else is going on.  As the Brennan Center, Demos, and even Rolling Stone have ably chronicled, young people - particularly students - face high barriers to entry for participating in the political process.

Since the 1970's and 80's, many university towns - particularly small towns in rural areas, where the students vastly outnumber local populations - have actively sought to disenfranchise students.  This has taken a variety of forms including closing polling places on campuses, declaring dormitories to be ineligible as a "permanent places of residence," and regulations necessitating that a student's place of residence and drivers license address match - a near impossibility for students.  Barriers like these are compounded by a problem that all young people typically face - we are a highly mobile bunch, switching residences, towns, even states from year to year as we jump jobs and apartments.  

If we want young people participating in politics, we should work to ensure that the system actually encourages and facilitates that participation.  One way to do that is Election Day Registration.  To be sure, it won't solve all of the problems I mentioned that prevent young people from voting, but it would be a huge step in the right direction.

In 2006, seven states employed Election Day Registration - Idaho, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, Wisconsin and Wyoming. According to Demos (pdf), those seven states consistently see some of the highest rates of turnout in the country (see graph below).  In 2006, turnout in EDR states was 48.7% vs. an average of 38.2% in non EDR states.  

Switching back to young voters, it is estimated that Election Day Registration could increase youth turnout by as much as 14%.  To put that into perspective, the massive turnout increase among young voters that we saw in 2004 represented only an 11% overall increase. If we had EDR in all 50 states, and young voters continued to vote 2-1 in favor of Democrats, we'd likely see a Democratic landslide that would dwarf last year's blue wave.