Public Supports Most Voting Rights Proposals By Democrats

 

The chart above is from the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between January 22nd and 25th of a nationwide sample of 1,500 adults, with a 3 point margin of error.

Pluralities Support Voting Rights And Ending Filibuster

The charts above are from the CBS News / YouGov Poll -- done between January 12th and 14th of a nationwide sample of 2,094 adults, with a 2.5 point margin of error.

 

Voting Is Too Important To Be Filibustered

There are two things necessary to sustain a democracy - the rule of law and citizen voting. Of those two, the one most important is the ability of every citizen to be able to exercise their right to vote. Without the right to vote, even the rule of law would soon disappear. Because this is true, one would expect Congress to make voting easier for all citizens.

But that is not happening. Republican legislatures across the country are doing just the opposite. They are making it harder to vote, using the excuse of preventing election fraud. The ignore the fact that there is virtually no fraud in U.S. elections. The real reason is to minimize the number of people who can vote (especially minorities and younger voters) in the hope that with a smaller voting population, they think they'll be able to achieve and retain power.

To combat these efforts at voter suppression, a bill is in Congress (the Freedom To Vote Act). This bill would make it easier for every citizens to exercise his/her right to vote while protecting against voter fraud. But sadly, the Republicans in Congress don't want to make it easier for citizens to vote. The Senate Republicans just voted unanimously to keep a filibuster against the voting rights bill. It is just one more example of why the filibuster (which is not in the Constitution) must be eliminated.

The following is part of an op-ed at MSNBC.com by Jessica Levinson on this issue:

Our democracy is based on the fundamental principle that all eligible citizens must have access to the ballot box and that each of those votes be given equal weight. A representative system of government lacks legitimacy if it fails to allow its citizens to pick who represents them. Why should we give any credence to the decisions of a president, a senator or a member of the House who got the job through a farcical election that blocked some from voting? Or, to put it another way: If our elected officials rigged the system and suppressed our votes to get or keep their gigs, why should we give them any authority?

This is why we must all turn to Wednesday’s failed attempt to pass the Freedom to Vote Act and make its eventual passage our first, second, third and fourth priorities. You don’t build a house until you have the blueprints. You don’t build a democracy without ensuring the right to vote.

Every single Republican in the Senate voted against even having a debate about the Freedom to Vote Act, which is already a compromised and whittled-down version of its former self. Again for the folks in back: Every single member of the Republican Party who serves in our nation’s top legislative chamber is a big “no” on even discussing ways to protect the right to vote. This is partisanship at its absolute worst. This is the epitome of party before country. . . .

We don’t need new restrictive state laws to protect our right to vote. We need new federal legislation to protect us from the restrictive voting laws.

Enter the Freedom to Vote Act.

It would push back against some state efforts to make voting less accessible. The bill tackles the twin problems of voter suppression and the influence of money in politics. With respect to voting rights, the bill would, among other things, implement automatic and same-day voter registration (allowing people to opt out, instead of making them opt in), make it easier to vote by mail, increase early voting, lessen the impact of some restrictive voter identification laws, make Election Day a federal holiday, increase punishments for those who engage in voting intimidation, and attempt to reduce partisan gerrymandering. As to the issue of money in politics, the bill would create a voluntary system of public campaign financing, increase campaign finance disclosure and reorganize the dysfunctional Federal Election Commission. . . .

It is time for voters to demand that their elected officials explain why we shouldn’t even proceed with a vote on the Freedom to Vote Act. We must ask our elected officials which provisions, specifically, they oppose and why. Why, for instance, should we not make it easier for people to register to vote and then give them more options for how and when to vote? We know these reforms don’t threaten the safety and integrity of our elections. Could it simply be that these reforms threaten the continued viability of Republicans?

There are so many deeply and immediately pressing issues facing our country. But for this moment, we must focus on the foundational one. By definition, the seed of our democracy is the right to vote. The right to vote is the right that leads to everything else we care about: a strong economy, an end to the pandemic, accessible health care and superior education.

Democrats control the White House, the House and the Senate. This is a once-in-a-generation moment. Democrats, abolish the filibuster. Pass true voting rights protections. Ensure that our grand experiment in self-governance continues. It is not a foregone conclusion that it will.

Republican Senators Voted Unanimously To Kill Voting Rights

The Senate voted again on Wednesday to stop the GOP filibuster of the Voting Rights bill. The bill would have made it easier for all citizens to vote in elections, while protecting against fraud (it contained an ID requirement). Sadly, every Republican senator voted to sustain the filibuster. They don't want to debate or vote on the bill -- and they certainly don't want to make it easier for everyone to vote. They support the effort by GOP state legislatures to make it harder for citizens to vote -- in the hope that with fewer voters they can stay in power. That's not democracy. It's the road to the demise of democracy and the path to authoritarianism.

Here's how journalist Dan Rather responded to the GOP killing the Voting Rights bill:

The news hits hard, once again. A reminder that democracy is fragile, very fragile. 

A vote in the United States Senate... entirely along party lines... about voting rights... where to even begin? 

Images flash across my mind of the long struggle for enfranchisement in America, which stretches back to the tragic imperfections under which this country was founded. These injustices defined the society of my youth, one of state-sponsored segregated society. When I started my career as a journalist, bearing witness to voter suppression across the South was one of my first assignments. I would later see it in different forms across the rest of the country. 

Fierce battles, sometimes bloody battles, over the basic freedom of fair elections has marked this nation's history, and the undercurrents remain. For all the progress we have made, we can see that these gains could prove illusory. The time for sugar coating reality has long since passed. We have large sections of our citizenry eager to undermine the most fundamental mechanism for a free, just, and accountable government. These forces have been stoked by a divisive autocrat who bent the Republican party to his whims and needs. 

I believe, however, it is too easy to chalk these voter suppression efforts to mere hatred or bigotry, though those currents are certainly at play. But I don't think the lines of demarcation are as clear as they were during the Civil Rights movement. As with back then, this is about power, raw power. But it is a power based on a view of the country that is more complex than race, although race certainly plays a part. It is about a belief that we should hew to only one vision of America, a vision that those on the far right of the political spectrum define as patriotism. It is an America where old social orders largely remain intact, where a view of what society is and should be passes through the most conservative of lenses. Those who had firmly felt themselves in the majority see this America slipping away. Rather than evolve and modernize, they would rather retrench with a steel-eyed political calculus: if you can't win a majority of voters, you must construct a system that allows for minority rule. 

One would like to think that in a country that prides itself on telling the rest of the world that we are a “city on a hill,” the issue of voting rights would be one that unites us. Even granting the most generous reasoning to the Republicans, that there were aspects of this bill that went too far, that they had concerns, then the healthy response would have been good-faith negotiations, not a stone wall of opposition. But compromise was never going to be in the cards because Republicans fear that an expansive approach to voting could pave the way for the extinction of their party in its current form. And they might very well be right. 

When presented with these facts it is understandable to feel demoralized, maybe even to the point of hopelessness. There is no shortage of injustice in what we are seeing - starting with the fact that progress on voting rights can be blocked by a minority of senators who represent an even smaller minority of voters. There is also no shortage of targets for finger pointing - those who won’t reform the filibuster, the Biden Administration for not doing enough to push the issue, the media which too often ignores voting rights, or frames it with false equivalence. 

But I would like to step back for a moment. From the founding of the United States onward, the forces who wanted to limit the power of government beyond their own group always had the advantage. Over time, however, that power has been eroded by the actions of Americans who refused to accept the status quo. This progress has come far too slowly, far too fitfully, and far too unevenly. But in the long run, the will of the majority cannot be easily suppressed. I remember covering Dr. Martin Luther King in the early days of the Civil Rights movement, when defeats far outpaced victories. He saw his struggle as one that would have many chapters. He knew that justice was on his side, and that those who stood in the way of progress could never take that away.  

I know how this moment feels, now, and for the important elections in 2022 and 2024, and beyond. I know the stakes. I feel them deeply. But I also know that the improbable progress that got us to where we are was made by people who refused to give up on what this country could be, and who were willing to do the work to make that a reality. This spirit is required to save America once more. 

Over 150 Corporations Sign Letter Supporting Voting Rights

The excerpt above is part of a letter sent to Congress by over 150 American Corporations in support of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. The corporations are members of a group called Business for Voting Rights. To read the entire letter and see all of the businesses that signed it, you can go here.

Hillary Clinton's Stand On Voting Rights

(Photo is by Kat Kane from Hillary Clinton's web site.)

From hillaryclinton.com:

“Yes, this is about democracy. But it’s also about dignity—about the ability to stand up and say, ‘Yes, I am a citizen. I am an American. My voice counts.’ And no matter where you come from or what you look like or how much money you have, that means something. … In fact, it means a lot.” 

HILLARY, JUNE 4, 2015

Hillary has laid out her vision for how to expand access to the ballot box for all Americans and how to defend against the systematic, deliberate efforts to stop millions of citizens from participating in our democracy:

• Repairing the Voting Rights Act. Congress should move quickly to pass legislation that would fix the damage done to the Voting Rights Act by the Supreme Court and restore the full protections American voters need and deserve. These protections are crucial for young and minority voters, seniors, and other underrepresented groups disproportionately affected by harmful Republican efforts to restrict voting.
• Setting a new national standard for early voting. It’s time to set a standard across our country of at least 20 days of early in-person voting, including opportunities for evening and weekend voting. This will reduce long lines and give more people an opportunity to vote, especially those who have work or family obligations during the day. Early in-person voting isn’t just convenient—it’s also more secure, more reliable, and more affordable than absentee voting.
• Implementing universal, automatic voter registration. Every citizen in every state should be automatically registered to vote when they turn 18, unless they choose to opt out. At the same time, we need to make sure that registration rolls are secure, up to date, and accurate. When you move, your registration should move with you. Modernizing registration will add tens of millions of voters to the rolls, cost less, and reduce the potential for errors or irregularities.

Cornyn - Voting Rights Bill "Discriminates Against Texas"

(The image of John Cornyn on the left was found at the excellent Texas blog called Off the Kuff.)

In 2013, the Supreme Court made a decision that severely impacts of the ability of the federal government to assure that states don't try to illegally suppress minority votes. They nullified the part of the Voting Rights Act that listed the states that needed federal approval before changing any voting laws (states that had a history of trying to exclude minorities from the election process). The court said that list was out of date, and was nullified until Congress could update it.

Well, Congress is now trying to fix the problem and protect the voting rights of minorities (and everyone else). Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisconsin), Rep. John Conyers (D-Michigan), and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) have co-authored an update to the Voting Rights Act. This new bill would require any state with 5 voting rights violations in 15 years to have to get federal pre-clearance before changing any voting laws or regulations. Currently that would apply to four states (Texas, Georgia, Louisiana, and Mississippi), but other states could be added to the list later if they try to suppress votes with unfair laws.

It was hoped that the new bill would get bi-partisan support in Congress (since one of the bill's authors is a Republican). But those hopes are being dimmed, and one of those leading the fight to kill the bill is Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). Cornyn claims the bill "discriminates against Texas", and that the state should be lauded for the "tremendous leaps and bounds" that Texas has made in assuring voting rights.

His statement (and position) is ludicrous. He is just trying to justify or deflect attention away from the new efforts in Texas to suppress minority votes (such as Voter ID and the redrawing of districts to favor the GOP). The truth is that protecting voter rights doesn't discriminate against Texas or any other state. It just keeps those states from backsliding into their old habits -- and recent efforts by the GOP in Texas show that is a distinct possibility.

But Cornyn is not now, and never has been, concerned about protecting the right of all citizens to vote. He's running for re-election this year, and he knows his chances (and those of other Republicans) are much better if minority voting is suppressed.

Public Opinion On Recent Court Decisions

Last week the Supreme Court announced three decisions that Americans had been eagerly awaiting -- decisions that could well have a big effect on the future direction of this country. The court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and Proposition 8. DOMA had denied equal rights from the federal government for those in same-sex marriages, and Prop 8 had banned same-sex marriages in California. The court also gutted the Voting Rights Act by declaring Section 4 of that law (which designated the states and localities that must get pre-clearance before changing voting rules or re-districting) was outdated, and therefore not valid.

Progressives hailed the DOMA and Prop 8 decisions as victories, and were horrified at the gutting of the Voting Rights Act. Reaction was just the opposite at the other end of the political spectrum -- as right-wingers hailed the VRA gutting as a victory, and were horrified by the DOMA and Prop 8 decisions. But the biggest question was -- what do the majority of Americans think about the decisions?

An ABC News/Washington Post Poll (done between June 26th and 30th by surveying a random national sample of 1,005 adults -- with a margin of error of 3.5 points) sought to answer that question. If the poll is accurate (and I believe it is), then the majority of Americans agree with the progressives on all three of these decisions (see the chart above) -- showing that this country is not nearly as right-wing as Republicans want to believe.

And these opinions cut across most demographic lines, with only conservatives, Republicans, and elderly Americans significantly disagreeing with the three court decisions. Here is the demographic breakdown -- with those approving of the decision being the first number given, and the percentage disapproving being in parentheses:

MEN
DOMA...............52% (45%)
Prop 8...............45% (51%)
VRA...............37% (51%)

WOMEN
DOMA...............60% (36%)
Prop 8...............57% (40%)
VRA...............30% (52%)

18 to 39
DOMA...............67% (30%)
Prop 8...............61% (33%)
VRA...............36% (48%)

40 to 64
DOMA...............54% (44%)
Prop 8...............47% (50%)
VRA...............33% (54%)

65 & OVER
DOMA...............41% (56%)
Prop 8...............36% (60%)
VRA...............32% (52%)

WHITES
DOMA...............57% (40%)
Prop 8...............51% (44%)
VRA...............33% (48%)

BLACKS
DOMA...............54% (44%)
Prop 8...............53% (45%)
VRA...............26% (71%)

HISPANICS
DOMA...............52% (43%)
Prop 8...............47% (51%)
VRA...............40% (50%)

COLLEGE GRADS
DOMA...............63% (33%)
Prop 8...............60% (36%)
VRA...............30% (52%)

NON-GRADS
DOMA...............54% (44%)
Prop 8...............47% (49%)
VRA...............35% (51%)

LIBERALS
DOMA...............79% (20%)
Prop 8...............75% (22%)
VRA...............27% (58%)

MODERATES
DOMA...............65% (31%)
Prop 8...............62% (33%)
VRA...............31% (55%)

CONSERVATIVES
DOMA...............38% (61%)
Prop 8...............31% (68%)
VRA...............37% (47%)

DEMOCRATS
DOMA...............68% (31%)
Prop 8...............62% (33%)
VRA...............29% (57%)

INDEPENDENTS
DOMA...............64% (33%)
Prop 8...............59% (39%)
VRA...............31% (53%)

REPUBLICANS
DOMA...............36% (62%)
Prop 8...............29% (69%)
VRA...............43% (42%)

Green Party Blasts Court's Gutting Of VRA

A few day's ago the Supreme Court basically gutted the Voting Rights Act by wiping out the section that enumerated those states and localities that needed approval before changing voting laws or re-districting (because they had a history of discrimination and denying of voting rights). This odious court decision once again opens the door for racists (and other Republicans) to restrict or deny voting rights to those they don't like (or those they think would vote against them).

The Green Party of the United States has now published (on June 26th) their response to this terrible court decision. Here it is, as written by Robert Fitrakis (the party's shadow cabinet FEC chair):

By a 5-4 vote today, June 25, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court has sanctioned the return of apartheid in nine states in our union that have a long legacy of blocking black and Latino voters.

The Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that required nine states, all but one former Confederate states, to seek pre-clearance from the U.S. Justice Department prior to changing election laws. The states are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.

Blatant racist attacks on the U.S. electorate have been the deliberate strategy of the Republican Party, in particular, since its theft of the 2000 presidential election in Florida.

In 2000, the Republican Party overtly embraced old-fashioned Jim Crow tactics, targeting former felons as a pretext for stripping 90,000 poor and minority voters from the voting rolls. A majority of the illegally purged voters were African American.

In 2004, the Republicans shifted these deliberate racist tactics to the pivotal battleground state of Ohio. More than 300,000 voters were eliminated from registration rolls in heavily Democratic urban areas such as Toledo and Cincinnati. In the city of Cleveland 24.93% of all voters in the 2000 presidential election vanished from the voting rolls. Republican Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, Ohio’s first black elected official, deployed a wide range of deceptive methods aimed at disenfranchising poor and minority voters. Also, urban areas were short-changed on voting machines and denied paper backup ballots. Tens of thousands of minority voters were forced to use the “back of the bus” provisional ballots, which often went uncounted or were discarded.

So successful were these new Jim Crow tactics in Ohio, the Republicans purged another 1.2 million in the 2008 election in the Buckeye State. They repeated this in 2012,  purging 1.25 million more voters.

Also in 2012, led by Georgia and Indiana, GOP-controlled legislatures began passing laws demanding state-issued photo ID cards for all voters. New York University’s Brennan Center estimated that such laws would disenfranchise more than 10 million voters. It is precisely this type of law that will go into effect in Texas as a result of this June 25 Supreme Court decision.

Poor, minority and elderly voters who do not drive, often do not have a photo ID. Moreover, forcing people who do not need a driver’s license or state-issued photo ID card should constitute an illegal poll tax.

The Supreme Court ruling removes the last remnants of protection for poor and minority voters and will openly invite new and creative ways to repress the most vulnerable people in our society.

What the Supreme Court should have done is expand the principles of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 into the emerging Jim Crow states of Ohio, Indiana, and Pennsylvania.  

What the Green Shadow Cabinet proposes goes far beyond a voting rights act. A new federal voting rights law, followed by a constitutional voting rights amendment must be passed guaranteeing all U.S. citizens the right to vote. In the spirit of Martin Luther King, Jr., ultimately we will be judged as a democracy by what we do to protect and defend the most vulnerable of our sisters and brothers.

Supreme Court Tosses Out Equal Voting Rights Protections For Minorities

The Supreme Court death a serious blow to the Voting Rights Act in their latest decision (announced on Tuesday). They invalidated Section 4 of that law -- the section that designated the states and localities that must pre-clear any changes to voting laws and procedures with the Justice Department before they can take effect. These localities were designated because they had a history of denying equal voting rights and representation to minorities.

The court threw out Section 4 because they said it was still using 1972 facts to determine those states and localities -- facts that may no longer be a reality. The court left Section 5 intact -- the section that actually calls for pre-clearance. But that section is useless without a designation of what states and localities it is required of.

The court did say that Congress could rewrite Section 4, using more modern facts/circumstances. But any hope of Congress doing that is nonexistent -- because the Republicans (who control the House and have the filibuster in the Senate) are the ones who were trying to get both Section 4 and Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act declared unconstitutional. Now that they have succeeded, they are not going to update Section 4 so that the law can again be both constitutional and effect in protecting minority rights. They will kill any attempt to rewrite Section 4.

And they will do it because they don't want minorities to have equal voting rights -- both because of the large number of racists in their voting base, and because they know that those minorities are not voting for their party (because of the GOP's anti-minority and anti-immigrant policies).

This pretty much leaves the Voting Rights Act as a nice idea, but an idea which cannot be enforced. I know that many right-wingers will claim that the law is no longer needed, but that is simply not true. Racism is alive and well in this country and many of those who pass and oversee voting laws in this country are racist. Their actions will not be as blatant as past actions denying voting rights, but their effect will be the same -- to curtail or deny voting rights to minorities (and other groups that tend not to vote for Republicans).

Any thought that this will not happen (and happen quickly) were dashed within hours of the court's announcement of their decision. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has already announced that Texas will re-institute both their old re-districting plan and their unfair Voter ID law -- both of which had been declared to be in violation of the Voter Rights Act, because they discriminated against minorities. Undoubtably, many other GOP-controlled states will follow suit. The Republicans showed with their actions leading up to the last election, that if they can't win voters over they will deny them the right to vote (or at least make it much harder for them to vote).

The court's decision was a giant step backward for equal rights in the United States. It is just sad that the Supreme Court, the institution created to protect citizen rights, is now they tool the right-wingers have used to deny those rights.