US voting rights

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      DoJ files lawsuit to challenge Georgia’s sweeping voting restrictions

      by

      The US justice department is filing a major federal lawsuit challenging a new sweeping voting measure in Georgia that is widely seen as a blatant effort to make it harder for minorities to vote in the state.The challenge is the first major voting rights case filed under the new Joe Biden administration and marks one of just a handful of suits the department has filed in recent years challenging voting laws on a statewide basis.The lawsuit, filed under section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, alleges Georgia Republicans passed a sweeping measure with the intent to deny people access to the ballot box based on their race.“Our complaint alleges that recent changes to Georgia’s election laws were enacted with the purpose of denying or abridging the right of Black Georgians to vote on account of their race or color in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act,” the attorney general, Merrick Garland, said during a Friday press conference.The move comes amid a wave of state laws passed by Republican-run legislatures across the US that are seen as attempts to suppress the vote of Democratic-leaning communities of color. It also comes after Republicans in the US Senate effectively torpedoed Democrat attempts to pass a new law defending voting rights.Garland announced the suit on the eighth anniversary of the supreme court’s decision in Shelby County v Holder, a case that gutted a critical provision in the Voting Rights Act and enabled states like Georgia to pass voting restrictions with much less federal oversight.If that provision was still in effect, the Georgia law would probably not have been enacted, Garland said on Friday.The Georgia law, enacted in March, makes significant changes to several aspects of voting in the state.The bill requires voters to provide identification information both when they request an absentee ballot and on the ballot itself. It also limits the use of absentee ballot drop boxes, allows for unlimited citizen challenges to voter qualifications and prohibits activists from handing out water to people standing in line to vote within 150ft of a polling place. It also creates a pathway for partisan officials to remove local election officials, a move experts have warned could lead to officials rejecting valid election results.The department’s lawsuit challenges several of those provisions, Kristen Clarke, the head of the DoJ’s civil rights division, said on Friday. She noted that the new restrictions on absentee voting came after Black voters used mail-in voting, a process long utilized by white voters in the state, in record numbers.Clarke singled out several provisions of the Georgia law the DoJ was zeroing in on, including measures that block election officials from sending out unsolicited ballot applications, limits on drop boxes, shortening the period to request and return an absentee ballot, the ban on assistance to voters in line, and a new restriction that throws out most provisional ballots cast in the wrong precinct.“The provisions we are challenging reduce access to absentee voting at each step of the process, pushing more Black voters to in-person voting, where they will be more likely than white voters to confront long lines. SB 202 then pushes additional obstacles to casting an in-person ballot,” she said.Georgia’s governor, Brian Kemp, a Republican, pledged to defend the law.“They are weaponizing the US Department of Justice to carry out their far-left agenda that undermines election integrity and empowers federal government overreach in our democracy,” he tweeted.Garland also announced on Friday the DoJ was forming a taskforce to investigate threats against election workers. He said Lisa Monaco, the deputy attorney general, had sent a memo to federal prosecutors instructing them to prioritize threats against election workers.“The right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy, the right from which all other rights ultimately flow. For this vital right to be effective, election officials must be permitted to do their jobs free from improper partisan influence, physical threats, or any other conduct designed to intimidate,” the memo says.LaTosha Brown, a co-founder of the group Black Voters Matter, praised the DoJ’s intervention and said it reflected the work of having Vanita Gupta and Clarke, two longtime voting rights attorneys, now in top roles at the justice department.“With DoJ getting involved, it elevates the conversation, it brings more firepower, and it sends a strong message to these states that this is not going to go without being answered.” More

    • 213 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Don’t despair over the Senate: a new voting rights law has never been closer | David Litt

      by

      This week, the For the People Act – the most sweeping voting-rights legislation in more than 50 years – came before the United States Senate, a place known, especially to itself, as “world’s greatest deliberative body”. Yet Republican senators refused to even debate the measure. Despite having the support of every member of the Democratic majority – a group of 50 senators that represents 40 million more constituents than their Republican counterparts – the bill failed to reach the 60-vote threshold for breaking a filibuster. It didn’t even come close.Given the stakes, it’s hardly surprising that some have rushed to portray For the People Act’s failure to pass the Senate as a political setback, a strategic misstep, or a presidency-defining blunder.To understand why American democracy still has a fighting chance, it’s important to consider three major developmentsBut such doomsday thinking ignores the big picture. Of course democracy advocates are disappointed – in theory, the Senate just blew a big chance to protect the republic from the greatest onslaught of authoritarianism the United States has ever faced. In practice, however, no voting-rights bill was ever going to pass the Senate on the first try. The important question has never been whether the For the People Act will win over 10 Republicans. The question is whether 50 Democrats can be convinced to end or alter the filibuster and then pass the For the People Act via a simple majority vote.Seen through this lens, this week’s vote was a step forward, not backward. Major voting-rights legislation has never been closer to becoming law.To understand why American democracy still has a fighting chance – and better-than-ever odds of prevailing – it’s important to consider three major developments, none of which was guaranteed when Democrats took the Senate with the slimmest of majorities six months ago.The first is that, despite President Trump’s attempt to overturn a legitimate election, his party’s unwillingness to stop him, and a well-funded campaign to turn voters against the For the People Act, democracy remains popular with the American people. According to one recent poll, 71% of Americans believe in-person early voting should be made easier, 69% support establishing national guidelines for voting, and a majority support expanding vote-by-mail as well.Thanks to a smart compromise proposal from Senator Joe Manchin, Democrats have even robbed Republicans of their one popular (if disingenuous) talking point in the debate over elections: support for voter ID. Mitch McConnell, the Koch political organization, and their conservative allies were hoping to turn voting rights into a political liability for Democrats, thus encouraging their members to drop the subject. Instead, the opposite has occurred. Continuing the fight to protect democracy is the right thing to do – and for Democratic senators, it’s the politically sensible thing to do as well.The moral and political case for protecting democracy has only been made more urgent by Republican overreach since the election. This wasn’t inevitable. In the wake of a closer-than-expected presidential race, and surprising strength in the House, state and local Republicans could have decided to appeal to moderate voters and enjoy their existing structural advantages, such as a rightwing majority on the supreme court and a large head start in the 2020 round of redistricting.Instead, Republicans doubled down on Trump’s authoritarian impulses. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, 389 bills restricting voting have been put forward in 48 states. These bills go far beyond previous voter suppression efforts, ensuring lengthy, public court battles and risking a backlash. Already, voting-restriction laws such as the one passed in Georgia have proven so audacious and so egregious that some of America’s largest corporations – who are rarely keen to criticize the GOP’s top priorities – have come out against them.In the face of threats that would have been unimaginable just a few years ago, Americans may yet save their democracyThe business community lending its support to voting rights, even in the abstract, has in turn given on-the-fence Democrats more room to maneuver. West Virginia’s Manchin, one of the filibuster’s most ardent defenders, joined voting-rights negotiations by proposing a version of the For the People Act he believes ought to receive substantial bipartisan support – and strongly implying he’ll consider reforming the filibuster if his proposal does not receive the support he thinks it deserves. Arizona’s Kyrsten Sinema, another filibuster holdout, has signaled a willingness to debate the Senate’s 60-vote threshold, even as she defends it. That leaves open the possibility that she may, eventually, support some kind of reform.Even some Republicans have inched, however slowly and subtly, toward supporting voting rights. While the Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski didn’t vote to break the filibuster against the For the People Act, she went out of her way to say that she supported certain key aspects of the bill. If the filibuster were no longer an impediment – if democracy advocates were trying to get to 51 rather than 61 – Murkowski’s vote would probably be in play. As recently as 4 January, when Republicans seemed likely to hold the Senate, the idea of a sweeping, bipartisan bill to end voter suppression and expand voting rights seemed wildly far-fetched. Today, it’s distinctly possible.Of course, just because something is possible does not make it likely. Democrats are racing against the clock. Campaign season will soon be upon us. Given the age of many in their caucus, there’s a chance Democrats’ Senate majority will be cut grimly short by a premature retirement or death. Manchin, Sinema and other lawmakers hoping to be prodded toward progress risk being too clever by half.But on the other hand, the slow-but-steady approach might just work – if activists continue to apply public pressure; if state-level GOP politicians continue to egregiously attack the vote; if public attention remains focused on the health of our democracy; if 50 Democrats reach a compromise that preserves the filibuster while allowing life-and-death legislation to pass. None of these things is certain to happen. But none of them is outside the realm of possibility. And all of them are more likely in the wake of this week’s vote.The path we’re on will never bring the sweeping, triumphant, day-one change that Democrats like me hoped for in the weeks before the election. But, in the face of threats that would have been unimaginable just a few years ago, Americans may yet save their democracy. And saving democracy would be more than good enough.
      David Litt is a former Obama speechwriter and New York Times bestselling author, and writes the newsletter How Democracy Lives More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats seek way ahead after voting rights bill hits Senate roadblock

      by

      After nearly six months of watching Republicans relentlessly make it harder to vote in the US, Democrats suffered a major blow on Tuesday after GOP senators used a legislative maneuver to halt a sweeping voting rights and ethics bill.The vote doesn’t kill the bill, but it marks one of the most significant setbacks for Democrats in Joe Biden’s presidency so far. Democrats heralded the legislation as their No 1 priority, even knowing they were unlikely to get any Republican votes for it. The bill would amount to the most significant expansion of the right to vote in a generation, requiring early voting and automatic and same-day registration, while prohibiting excessive manipulation of electoral district boundaries, a process often called gerrymandering.Sign up for the Guardian’s Fight to Vote newsletterIt wasn’t an unexpected result. Democrats control only 50 seats in the Senate and a procedural rule, the filibuster, blocks most legislation from proceeding to a full debate on the floor unless it has 60 votes. A handful of Democratic senators, most notably Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, support keeping the filibuster in place, saying it helps ensure the minority party has a say. But while the rule remains, Democrats have virtually no chance of passing sweeping voting rights legislation.Democratic senators are now in a quagmire amid escalating concerns that Democrats, who control both Congress and the White House, might not be able to use their power to stop what many experts see as openly anti-democratic efforts by Republicans across the country to make it harder to vote after an election in which there was record turnout, including surges among Black, Asian American and Hispanic voters.Republicans have used partisan majorities in statehouses across the US to pass these measures, even as they have accused Democrats of acting with partisan intent to pass voting reforms.Raphael Warnock, a Democratic senator from Georgia, harshly criticized Republican colleagues for refusing to even allow a vote on the bill on the Senate floor.“Surely, some of my Republican friends believe – at the very least – that in this chamber, we should be able to debate about voting rights,” he said. “Voting rights are preservative of all other rights. And what could be more hypocritical and cynical than invoking minority rights in the Senate as a pretext for preventing debate about how to preserve minority rights in the society?”Tuesday’s vote on whether to allow debate on the bill was widely seen as a maneuver to pressure Republicans into taking a public stance on the bill and to pressure moderate Democrats, including Manchin and Sinema, to take a position.In a statement a few hours before the vote, the White House offered a blunt assessment of the attack on voting rights across the United States. “Democracy is in peril,” it said, urging senators to support the bill.“This kicks off the next phase of the fight,” said Tiffany Muller, the president of End Citizens United and Let America Vote, a group running a $30m campaign in support of the bill. “If I had a nickel for every time someone wrote ‘this bill was dead’, I would have enough to fund the entire campaign. People have been counting this bill and these efforts out for the entire year, and not really seeing what was happening across the country.”Nsé Ufot, CEO of the New Georgia Project, a Georgia-based group that has worked for years to mobilize voters in the state, called on the White House to increase its efforts to pressure senators who opposed the bill.“Where is the fight?” she said. “I understand that the upper house, the upper chamber, there’s a focus on collegiality … [but] collegiality at the expense of actually getting stuff done, collegiality at the expense of preserving Americans’ ability to participate in our elections, seems misguided.”It’s not clear what the path forward might look like. Last week, Manchin released a compromise that maintained some of the most important provisions in the bill – including making election day a federal holiday, requiring two weeks of early voting, allowing automatic registration at motor vehicle offices, and mandating that states give voters seven days’ notice of a polling place change. However, the proposal does include a voter ID requirement, allowing for more aggressive voter purging, and does not require states to create independent redistricting commissions, which reformers see as a gold standard in curbing excessive gerrymandering.Manchin wound up voting with Democrats on Tuesday to move to advance the bill, an encouraging sign to bill supporters that further highlights Republican obstructionism.“These reasonable changes have moved the bill forward and to a place worthy of debate on the Senate floor,” Manchin said in a statement. “Unfortunately, my Republican colleagues refused to allow debate of this legislation despite the reasonable changes made to focus this bill on the core issues facing our democracy.”Republicans appear unlikely to come around on Manchin’s compromise bill. And while Barack Obama endorsed the compromise on Monday, more than 20 civil rights groups, including the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and Black Voters Matter, said the proposal was inadequate.“Senator Manchin’s compromise fails to adequately address the more than 400 voter suppression measures that are being introduced across the country,” they wrote in a joint statement. “Most damaging is its neglect of protections for formerly incarcerated and justice impacted voters; voters with disabilities; Black and all multi-marginalized voters. There has been no indication from Senator Manchin’s reported conversations with conservatives that he has been able to secure Republican support for any of the core elements of [the legislation] which is disappointing to the many activists who are pushing for passage of the bill.”It’s also not clear how Democrats plan to get around the filibuster. Manchin has been steadfast in his commitment to the rule, though privately he has left the door open to lowering the threshold of votes needed to overcome a filibuster. Sinema, another staunch supporter of the filibuster, also authored an op-ed in the Washington Post on Monday evening saying she was committed to keeping the procedure in place.Muller pointed to the Senate’s August recess as a deadline to pass a bill, when many states are set to begin drawing electoral districts for the next decade. Republicans control the redistricting process in many states and without the anti-gerrymandering provisions of the bill in place, lawmakers would be free to manipulate districts to give them a significant advantage in elections.“We are literally seeing this very direct undermining of our democracy. And if that goes unchecked, I am very concerned about the future of our democracy,” she said.Nearly 500 state lawmakers wrote to Senate leadership on Tuesday begging them to pass the sweeping bill.“We have attempted again and again to work with our Republican colleagues to set policies that safely and securely expanded voting access – but they simply refuse to act in good faith,” they wrote. “We are out of options. We need your help.” More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats present united front in For the People Act vote – video

      by

      Democrats demonstrated unity in the US senate as the West Virginia senator Joe Manchin said he would vote in favor of advancing voting rights legislation known as the For the People act to the debate stage.
      The Republican Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell, denied any voter suppression was happening despite around 400 bills introduced in more than 43 states which could restrict the right to vote. The legislation would remove hurdles to voting.
      In the evenly split Senate, Republican votes mean the bill will not garner the necessary 60 votes to advance.

      US politics: latest updates More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Obama backs Manchin’s voting rights compromise before crucial Senate vote

      by

      Barack Obama has backed conservative West Virginia Democratic senator Joe Manchin’s voting rights proposal, calling it a “product of compromise” as the landmark legislation struggles towards a crucial vote in the US Senate on Tuesday.The former US president weighed in, as did his wife and former first lady, Michelle Obama, decrying Republican efforts in many statehouses across the country to bring in new laws that restrict voting, and urging Congress to pass federal legislation “before it’s too late”.Barack Obama said the future of the country was at stake.“I have tried to make it a policy not to weigh in on the day-to-day scrum in Washington, but what is happening this week is more than just a particular bill coming up or not coming up to a vote,” he said in an interview with Yahoo News.He added: “I do want folks who may not be paying close attention to what’s happening … to understand the stakes involved here, and why this debate is so vitally important to the future of our country,” Obama said.And the White House said on Monday it views the Senate’s work on an elections bill overhaul and changes being offered by Manchin as a “step forward”, even though the Democrats’ priority legislation is expected to be blocked by a Republican filibuster.White House press secretary Jen Psaki said the revisions proposed by Manchin are a compromise, another step as Democrats work to shore up voting access and what Joe Biden sees as “a fight of his presidency”.“The president’s effort to continue that fight doesn’t stop tomorrow at all,” Psaki said.The Senate is preparing for a showdown Tuesday, a test vote of the For the People Act, a sweeping elections bill that would be the largest overhaul of US voting procedures in a generation.A top priority for Democrats seeking to ensure access to the polls and mail-in ballots made popular during the pandemic, it is opposed by Republicans as a federal overreach into state systems.Manchin has been a vocal Democratic Party holdout on Capitol Hill, opposing the For the People Act and insisting on gleaning bipartisan support for such legislation.But last week he introduced a list of compromises he would support, including 15 days of early voting and automatic voter registration. His compromise would also ban partisan gerrymandering and requiring voter ID.Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican from Kentucky, said he opposed the compromise, and hopes are fading in many Democratic quarters that a vote on Tuesday in the Senate will take the legislation to the debate stage, thus leaving it stalled.In his latest interview, Obama said Democrats and Republicans have abused the redistricting process, but shared concerns about efforts in Republican-controlled states to limit access to voting.“Around the world we’ve seen once-vibrant democracies go in reverse,” Obama said. “It is happening in other places around the world and these impulses have crept into the United States … we are not immune from some of these efforts to weaken our democracy.”“If we have the same kinds of shenanigans that brought about January 6, you know – if we have that for a couple more election cycles we’re going to have real problems in terms of our democracy long term.”In a post on Instagram, Michelle Obama talked of the Biden legislation fighting voter suppression and strengthening democracy.“Over the past few months, there’s been a movement in state legislatures all across the country to pass laws that make it harder for people to cast a ballot. That means we’ve got to pass the For the People Act before it’s too late. This bill is one of our best chances…to ensure all of us have a say in our future – whether that’s issues like pandemic relief, criminal justice, immigration, healthcare, education, or anything else,” she wrote.Manchin had been the sole holdout. His proposed changes to the bill are being well received by some in his party, and any nod from the White House lends them credibility.He has suggested adding a national voter ID requirement, which has been popular among Republicans, and dropping other measures from the bill like its proposed public financing of campaigns.Among voting rights advocates, one key voice, Georgia-based Democrat and activist Stacey Abrams, has said she could support Manchin’s proposal.Ahead of Tuesday’s vote, it is clear Democrats in the split 50-50 Senate will be unable to open debate, blocked by a filibuster by Republicans.In the Senate, it takes 60 votes to overcome the filibuster, and without any Republican support, the Democrats cannot move forward.“Will the Republicans let us debate it?” said Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer as he opened the chamber on Monday afternoon. “We’re about to find out.” More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Bad strategy? How the Republican attack on voting rights could backfire

      by

      As the coronavirus wreaked havoc around the world, lawmakers in the US were faced with a monumental task: carrying out a presidential election in the middle of a once-in-century pandemic.Concerned about the possibility of virus spread at polling places, Democrats pushed the federal government to approve more funding for states to expand absentee and early-voting options.But Donald Trump was against the idea for a single reason: he thought it would make it harder for Republicans to win. Trump said in a Fox News interview in March of last year that, if early and absentee voting options were expanded as Democrats wanted, “you’d never have a Republican elected in this country again.” Other Republicans have echoed Trump’s argument in recent months, as the party has pushed hundreds of bills to restrict voting access in dozens of states.But voting experts now say the restrictions being approved in Republican-led states may not help the party’s chances in future elections, and in some cases, the laws may even prevent their own supporters from going to the polls. Put simply, in seeking to suppress the vote, Republicans may be shooting themselves in the foot.Republican legislators across the country have taken aggressive action to restrict access to the ballot box this year, as Trump has continued to spread the “big lie” that there was widespread fraud in the presidential election. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, at least 389 bills with restrictive voting provisions have been introduced in 48 states this year, and 22 of those bills have already been enacted.The Republican bills take particular aim at mail-in voting, after Joe Biden’s supporters used the voting method at disproportionately high rates in the 2020 election. However, it is unclear whether restricting mail-in voting will aid Republicans in future elections.A recent study conducted by a team at the Public Policy Institute of California found that, while making mail-in voting easier did increase overall turnout, it did not necessarily result in better electoral outcomes for Democrats. In fact, many models indicated that easy access to mail-in voting resulted in slightly better outcomes for Republican candidates.This may be in part because older voters, who lean Republican, are more likely to vote by mail. According to census data, nearly 54% of Americans aged 65 or older cast their ballots by mail last year.“This can impact people regardless of their political affiliation,” said Kathleen Unger, founder of the group VoteRiders, which helps people navigate voter ID laws. “There are many people, including obviously Republicans, especially seniors and older voters, who are accustomed to voting by mail. Making it more difficult to vote by mail creates a very real barrier for all these people.”The new voting restrictions may also deter lower-turnout constituencies who have been drifting more toward the Republican party in recent years. Studies have indicated that more highly educated Americans are more likely to report having participated in elections, and those voters have recently been moving toward the Democratic party. One analysis from the progressive firm Catalist found that white voters without college degrees made up 58% of Trump’s 2020 voters.“There’s been an increasing educational divide between the two parties. And it is the case that less-educated voters are less likely to vote, and it is harder for them to vote in a wide variety of ways,” said Robert Griffin, research director of the Democracy Fund Voter Study Group. “Throwing up additional barriers to voting is not always the best idea if your coalition is increasingly reliant on lower-propensity voters.”Republican legislators are clearly counting on the idea that these voting restrictions will affect Democratic voters more than their own supporters. Indeed, voting rights groups say many of the provisions in the new laws specifically target Black voters, 90% of whom supported Biden in November.For example, one provision in Georgia’s controversial voting law requires anyone requesting an absentee ballot to have a state-issued driver’s license or ID on file. If the voter does not have a Georgia-issued ID, they must send a photocopy of an alternative proof of identification to the state to obtain an absentee ballot.Existing voting records indicate this requirement would have an outsized influence on Black voters, who are less likely to have a state-issued ID. However, Unger noted the provision could also negatively impact older voters who may not have a valid driver’s license because they no longer drive. And in a state like Georgia, which Biden won by about 12,000 votes out of nearly 5m ballots cast, every lost voter matters.Christina Harvey, managing director of the grassroots voting rights group Stand Up America, argued that Republicans were “surgically targeting these laws to have the biggest impact on Black and brown voters”, but she acknowledged they would have an impact on all voters.“The point is everyone should have equal access to the ballot no matter what they look like, where they live or how they prefer to vote,” Harvey said. “Policies that are targeted at disenfranchising Black and brown voters or even Democratic voters may impact those people disproportionately, but they also eat away at everyone’s freedom to vote.” More