It looks like Rove & Co. have their work cut out for them, the DoJ 
having turned down the
president's [sic] request that they look into forcing a review of 
those 200,000 newly registered
(Democratic) voters in Ohio. The URL for Robert Parry's piece on this 
development is just below.

And, nationwide, a number of the GOP's attempts at vote suppression 
have been slapped down
by various courts, as Zachary Roth reports for TPM. (Below that is an 
article on what's gone
down in Colorado.)

All of this is most encouraging--but no good reason for complacency, 
because with Karl
in charge, and with the US press the way it is, you never know.

MCM


Pressure from Ohio Republicans and President Bush appears to have 
failed to get the Justice Department to intervene in Ohio.

For the full story, go to 
<http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=QIUou3FMsanL5zQsJB9UaWhJ729phe2s>http://www.consortiumnews.com.




GOP Voter Suppression:
More Miss than Hit

By <http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/zroth>Zachary Roth - 
October 30, 2008, 1:10PM

Yesterday we 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/republican_voter_suppression_a.php>posted
 
a quick round-up of the various voter-suppression schemes being 
pushed by Republicans in swing states around the country. And after 
looking at the list, one thing quickly becomes clear: most of the 
efforts have failed.

There's no one grand unifying theory for why that's true.

In some cases, the courts have rejected GOP efforts to make voting harder:

In Indiana, for instance, a Superior Court judge 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/early_voting_to_proceed_in_min.php>declined
 
to support a GOP bid to shut down early voting centers in 
Democratic-leaning cities in Lake County, and the state Supreme Court 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/indiana_supreme_court_wont_sto.php>chose
 
not to immediately intervene.
In Wisconsin, a suit brought by Republican Attorney General J.B. Van 
Hollen -- which he later 
<http://www.uppitywis.org/cnn-van-hollen-admits-gop-lawsuit-collusion>admitted 
had been requested by the Republican Party -- seeking to force the 
state election board to re-confirm all newly registered voters was 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/court_throws_out_wi_ag_voting.php>thrown
 
out by a county court.
In Michigan, a federal appeals court today 
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20081030/michigan-voter-registration/>blocked
 
the Republican secretary of state, Terri Lynn Land, from throwing 
5,500 newly registered voters off the rolls because their 
registration cards were returned as undeliverable, after 
voting-rights groups sued.
In other states, Democratic state officials or voting-rights 
advocates have held the line:

In Nevada, Secretary of State Ross Miller 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/nevada_secretary_of_state_rebu.php>denied
 
a 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/nevada_gop_cracking_down_on_ur.php>request
 
from the state GOP to require voters to cast provisional ballots if 
they fixed mistakes in their voting information at the polls.
In Colorado, a bid by Republican Secretary of State Mike Coffman -- 
who himself is running for a seat in the U.S. House -- to purge 
14,000 voters from the rolls was only partially successful. After 
voting-rights groups sued, a settlement 
<http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/oct/30/deal-ensures-20000-taken-off-rolls-can-to-vote/>was
 
reached yesterday allowing the voters to cast provisional ballots. 
According to the Rocky Mountain News, those ballots would "be 
presumed to be valid unless state and county officials prove 
otherwise." A lawyer for the voting-rights groups called the deal "a 
win-win."
In still other places, it's been a combination of both factors:


In Ohio -- perhaps the most high-profile example of voter-suppression 
this cycle -- the state GOP sued to force Secretary of State Jennifer 
Brunner to provide local election officials with the names of new 
voters whose registration information didn't match other government 
documents. Brunner resisted, arguing, it appears correctly, that the 
information would be used to challenge large numbers of voters and 
cause chaos at the polls. The U.S. Supreme Court ultimately 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/supreme_court_sides_with_dems.php>sided
 
with Brunner. (The Department of Justice deserves some of the credit 
here, too, for declining a 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/white_house_wants_doj_action_o.php>request
 
by the White House to intervene.)
And in some states, the Republicans appear to have done themselves in 
through the sheer chutzpah of their behavior, and the resulting 
outcry:

In Montana, the state GOP 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/montana_gop_challenges_thousan.php>announced
 
plans to challenge 6000 voters in predominantly Democratic counties, 
based on discrepancies between in their listed addresses. But after 
even Republicans in the state 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/montana_gop_targets_wwii_hero.php>denounced
 
the ploy, the party 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/montana_gop_drops_backs_off_vo.php>backed
 
off, and its executive director 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/montana_gop_chief_out_after_fa.php>resigned.
In New Mexico, the state party 
<http://www.koat.com/politics/17736001/detail.html?rss=alb&psp=news>held 
a press conference at which it released the names, and some personal 
information, of ten voters, almost all Hispanic, that it said had 
voted fraudulently in a Democratic primary in June. It was later 
<http://www.acorn.org/index.php?id=12439&L=1%3Fid%3D8&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=22396&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=12346&cHash=cbef384fbf>established
 
that they were all legitimate voters. The U.S. Department of Justice 
is now 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/report_doj_lawyer_meets_with_a.php>investigating
 
reports by 
<http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/is_new_mexico_gop_lawyer_hirin.php>TPMmuckraker
 
and 
<http://newmexicoindependent.com/6457/nm-gop-accused-of-voter-intimidation>others
 
that a lawyer attached to the party sent a private investigator to 
the homes of some of these voters to question them about their voting 
status -- potentially violating federal voting laws.
Of course, that's not to suggest that Republican suppression efforts 
haven't been successful anywhere. In Florida, for instance, Secretary 
of State Kurt Browning, a Republican, has 
<http://www.wmnf.org/news_stories/6289>instructed election officials 
to reject voter registration applications that do not pass a computer 
match test. Voting-rights groups 
<http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/florida_naacp_v_browning/>say 
the system can disqualify voters based on nothing more than a missing 
middle initial on their voter form. They fear the move could 
disenfranchise tens of thousands of legitimate voters. (Though even 
in the Sunshine State, there's a bright spot. GOP governor Charlie 
Crist on Tuesday 
<http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/florida/story/745715.html>ordered 
extended hours for early voting centers, after long lines were 
reported in many parts of the state.)

Of course, the whole point of the voter-suppression game is to throw 
up as many gambits as possible, and hope that just a few succeed. And 
there's no way to measure the effect that even the unsuccessful ploys 
have in generating cynicism about the process itself, and thereby 
reducing turnout, to Republicans' advantage. So in a close election, 
it's still possible that voter suppression could make the difference 
-- as it 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A99749-2001May30>may well 
have done in 2000.

But it's worth noting that -- thanks largely to Democratic control of 
the secretary of state's offices in some key states; the skepticism 
with which many courts have looked on efforts to put obstacles in the 
way of voting; and the role of voting-rights groups and the press in 
exposing the bankruptcy of Republican claims -- the nationwide GOP 
voter-suppression effort appears to have been far less successful 
than the party might have hoped.

Not that we expect them to drop the tactic any time soon.


Colorado Agrees to
Restore Voters to Rolls
By DAN FROSCH and 
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/u/ian_urbina/index.html?inline=nyt-per>IAN
 
URBINA

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/31/us/politics/31colorado.html?ref=us

DENVER - Tens of thousands of Coloradans who had been removed from 
the state's voter rolls will be allowed to vote in next week's 
election and given extra protections so their ballots are counted, 
under an agreement reached late Wednesday in federal court here.

The voters' names had been removed by Mike Coffman, the 
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/national/usstatesterritoriesandpossessions/colorado/index.html?inline=nyt-geo>Colorado
 
secretary of state, who said he did so because the voters had moved 
out of state or were listed more than once on the rolls. But Mr. 
Coffman was sued by a coalition of voting rights and other groups who 
said such purges were generally prohibited by federal law within 90 
days of an election.

Under the agreement, voters removed from the rolls will be permitted 
to cast provisional ballots, and those ballots will be counted unless 
election officials can prove the voters were not eligible. To strike 
such ballots, county election officials must conduct an extensive 
records review on each one, a decision that must then be reviewed by 
Mr. Coffman's office.

"This is unprecedented," said Elizabeth Westfall, a lawyer for the 
Advancement Project, a civil rights group that helped file the 
lawsuit. "We are really thrilled that there will be this degree of 
unprecedented scrutiny and protection for these purged voters when 
they cast their provisional ballots."

Mr. Coffman issued a statement Thursday saying he still believed that 
Colorado's election practices adhered to federal law and that "our 
goal has always been to have a system in place where every voter, who 
has the legal right to cast a ballot, is allowed to do so."

Edward B. Foley, a law professor at 
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/o/ohio_state_university/index.html?inline=nyt-org>Ohio
 
State University and an authority on voting litigation nationwide, 
said the settlement was noteworthy because many states had put the 
onus on voters to prove that their provisional ballots were 
legitimate before they could be counted. The settlement shifts this 
responsibility to the state, Mr. Foley said, and is more in keeping 
with the spirit of the federal Help America Vote Act of 2002, which 
calls for election officials to count a provisional ballot if they 
can determine the voter's eligibility.

In 
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/national/usstatesterritoriesandpossessions/michigan/index.html?inline=nyt-geo>Michigan,
 
a federal appeals panel in Detroit delivered a similar victory on 
Thursday for about 5,500 voters who had been dropped from the rolls. 
The 2-to-1 ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth 
Circuit said state elections officials should not remove registered 
voters from the rolls, even if their voter ID cards had been returned 
as undeliverable. The lawsuit was filed by the 
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/a/american_civil_liberties_union/index.html?inline=nyt-org>American
 
Civil Liberties Union, the United States Student Association 
Foundation and the Michigan branch of the 
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/n/national_association_for_the_advancement_of_colored_people/index.html?inline=nyt-org>National
 
Association for the Advancement of Colored People.


Related

<http://www.nytimes.com/ref/us/politics/Voters-Guide.html>Help for 
Voters:  A list of Web sites that provide information about voter 
registration.




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to Mark Crispin Miller's 
"News From Underground" newsgroup.

To unsubscribe, send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR go to 
http://groups.google.com/group/newsfromunderground and click on the 
"Unsubscribe or change membership" link in the yellow bar at the top of the 
page, then click the "Unsubscribe" button on the next page. 

For more News From Underground, visit http://markcrispinmiller.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to