FairVote Feed: D.C. Voting Rights

The Right to Vote: The case of the people of our nation’s capital

Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:26:43 -0700

On March 29th, DC Vote held an advocacy day to meet with the staff of every U.S. Senator and discuss the need for voting rights for the people of the District of Columbia. Washington, D.C, has more than a half million people, more than Wyoming. Although the District has a delegate in the U.S. House (Eleanor Holmes Norton) who can propose legislation and serve on committee, she does not have voting rights in Congress. The District lacks even a delegate in the U.S. Senate, even though Congress can veto any bill passed by the District and often considers “riders’ on bills that would change laws governing the residents of the District – a classic case of “taxation without representation.” The issue has become heated recently; Mayor of DC Vincent Gray was arrested at a protest calling for more freedom for the District to spend its own funds.

The DC Vote coalition advocated for the ability for the District’s government to use its own funds for programs they deemed necessary for the stability and growth of the District. As stated by DC Vote, “The House has passed a budget bill that would prohibit the District from spending its own funds on programs that prevent the spread of the local AIDS epidemic and help low-income women obtain safe reproductive health care.” The District's budget has been balanced for well over a decade, and the funds for such programs are available, but unusable without Congressional approval.

The disenfranchisement of all of the District is yet another area in the right to vote conversation. The District is home to more than 600,000 people who lack basic representation in their government. In fact, it wasn’t until the passage of the 23rd Amendment in 1961 that District's residents were allowed to vote for President of the US, despite being drafted into the US military and paying some of the highest taxes in the country.

The District has no final authority over its own budget, no direct sway in the national budget, and no vote in the consideration of federal laws they are subject to. This means that issues, like school vouchers within the District's boarders, gun control within DC, reproductive rights, and marijuana use are controlled more by representatives from South Dakota than they are by representatives from the District. Washington College law professor Jamie Raskin points out that “when congressional representation is denied, other injuries follow, such as the inability to obtain equal services and a fair share of federal resources…District residents, by virtue of their lack of political representation, have a lesser opportunity to compete for federal resources in Congress.”

It is true the District is not a state, and from this stems the argument that the District's residents don’t “deserve’ the same representation as a state resident. Yet, the District's residents are a global anomaly; America is the only country in the world that disenfranchises the resident of its capital city.

Contrary to popular belief, the District is not primarily a home for transient politicos who have no vested interest in their community. There are tens of thousands of people who were born within the the District's city limits and will live their entire lives here without ever being represented in the government that is only blocks from their front door; in fact more than 50% of the District's residents have been DC residents for longer than 20 years.

Opponents argue that the District is home to too many federal lands and buildings to be autonomous. Yet, 88% of Nevada, 68% of Utah, and 50% of California are federal lands, and all these states of course have voting representatives in Congress, including two U.S. Senators.

It is also undeniable there is a racial component to this argument; if a state, the District would be the nation’s only majority-black state. Given that none of our 100 U.S. Senators are African American, the lack of representation for the District takes on even greater meaning.

Without a direct voice in Congress, the District cannot expect to gain control over its own affairs. Efforts have been made to rectify this wrong, but all have fallen short.

- DC statehood constitutional amendment: HR 265 is an often proposed amendment (you can read the text here) that calls for the District to be a state, equal to the other 50 states in the US. Proposed by Eleanor Holmes Norton, the bill has not seen much movement in the 112th Congress. While the DC Voting Rights Amendment was passed by Congress in 1978, it expired before enough states ratified it, and therefore could not take effect. 38 states were required for ratification; the amendment was passed in 16 states.
- By party rule, democrats allowed Norton to vote on the floor during the 111th Congress, if her vote was not a decisive vote. However, this year, Republicans in the House moved to have her vote removed, on the very first day of Congress’s session. While Rep. Norton can vote in subcommittees, she can not vote on the floor of Congress. Rep. Norton can not vote in the Committee of the Whole.
- In the 111th Congress, the DC House Voting Rights Act (H.R.157/S.160) was proposed. Sponsored by Rep. Norton in the House, and Senators Lieberman and Hatch in the Senate. While the bill passed in the Senate, it did not pass overall. The bill would have given a full voting member to Congress, and an additional full voting member to Utah.

Establishing a citizenship right to vote wouldn’t guarantee that the people of the District would have representation and a fully protected right to vote, but it would require our courts to bring stricter scrutiny to the problem –and create a clearer reason for our policymakers to once and for all redress this wrong. In the meantime, let’s ask our members of Congress to treat the District’s citizens with respect and not trample on home rule powers.

Live Blogging from the polls in DC

Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:44:10 -0700

2:45pm (Update)

I have been working since 6am (8hrs!) and I haven't eaten a thing yet or even taken a bathroom break. I wouldn't say it's been busy, but there is always at least one or two people needing assistance at any given point.

11:00am (Update)

Finally there is a lull in the voting. As a poll worker, I am a Special Ballots Clerk which means I provide assistance for those who are not in the official poll books and registered to vote at this location. There are many reasons why one would not be in the books: not registered, recently moved, changed name, or if you are registered in a different polling location in the city. Here in DC, we have Same-Day registration so if you are not registered but eligible to do so, you can register and submit your ballot at the polls.

So far, we have had a smattering of all of the above.

9:33am

The polls opened promptly at 7am this morning, and I was very surprised to see a line of ten voters at the polls here at MLK Library in Downtown Washington DC. With no competitive citywide elections (as opposed to the high turnout Primary), voters here are voting for Delegate to the House, Mayor, Council Chairman, At-large member of City Council, US "Shadow" Representative, Advisory Neighborhood Council and a Ballot measure. Through the course of the day, I'll write more about these positions.

Already we have had over a hundred voters, a number that is probably paltry in comparison to those in any big state or swing state- but it's pretty impressive in an uncompetitive cycle for what equates a symbolic vote.

Voting Rights Act turns 45

Fri, 06 Aug 2010 13:48:02 -0700

Today marks the 45th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, one of the true landmarks in our history. The right to vote and, and our First Amendment rights are the pillar of ensuring government operates with the consent of the government.

However, we must face a bracing reality: the Constitution does not establish an affirmative right to vote. In its 2000 decision in Bush V. Gore, the Supreme Court asserted that “The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States.”

Not having a clear, affirmative right to vote may be shocking to some, given amendments to the Constitution providing suffrage rights to women, African Americans and young adults and statues like the Voting Rights Act. Those laws provide for equality in voting; they do not guarantee quality. That’s why it took a constitutional amendment in 1964 to ban poll taxes and why the citizens of the District of Columbia can be denied a right to vote in Congress today. That’s why some 13,000 jurisdictions make independent decisions about matters like ballot design, polling places, voting equipment and poll workers that affect elections for our highest offices – with little accountability for those decisions.

Many election officials do heroic work, but their decisions are governed by too few standards, they often lack sufficient funding and their performance can lack transparency and accountability. Those deficiencies can translate into long lines, untested ballot designs, buggy voting software, error-ridden voter rolls and lackluster poll workers. Partisans all too often can influence who votes and how easy it is to vote.

Such problems combine to cause significant damage to suffrage rights. Further protection must be anchored in the Constitution. Voting should be a fundamental citizenship right. To establish such an affirmative right, we need a constitutional amendment, currently proposed by Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr. in the form of HJR 28. FairVote strongly supports this proposal.

But an amendment takes time. Keeping it as our clear goal, local officials can take immediate steps. For example, Chicago last year debated legislation calling on Congress to approve the Right to Vote amendment and pledging to review its laws and procedures to uphold the right to vote in its own elections.

Even as our country fights to expand democracy around the world and even as we rightly celebrate the Voting Rights Act of 1965, let’s act to protect our own right to vote. I urge jurisdictions to start by promoting the right to vote in their own local jurisdictions. Ask your city council to protect your right to vote and to join a grassroots effort to protect a “right” that should have no asterisk: let’s work to put a right to vote the Constitution and have that ideal govern our elections wherever they take place.

Read the text of the Chicago resolution.
See our other resources on the Right to Vote.

President Obama Calls for DC Voting Rights

Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:52:54 -0700

After more than a year of his presidency, Barack Obama has finally called on Congress to give residents of our nation's capital representation and to improve its Home Rule Charter. Today, April 16th, is Emancipation Day. This is when President Abraham Lincoln freed the enslaved people of Washington, DC a full nine months before issuing the Emancipation Proclamation. District residents celebrate this day every year for the freedom we have, but also use it as a reminder that the struggle for equality is not yet over. While people who live in the District serve in the military and pay federal taxes, they continue to have no voice in Congress.

The United States is the only country on earth that denies its citizens living in the capital a vote in its national legislature. Congress should act quickly and decisively to end this injustice and give the District of Columbia full control of its own destiny.

Here is President Obama's statement marking Emancipation Day:

On this occasion, we remember the day in 1862 when President Lincoln freed the enslaved people of Washington, DC – nine months before he issued the Emancipation Proclamation. I am proud that an original copy of that document now hangs in the Oval Office, and we remain forever grateful as a nation for the struggles and sacrifices of those Americans who made that emancipation possible.

Americans from all walks of life are gathering in Washington today to remind members of Congress that although DC residents pay federal taxes and serve honorably in our armed services, they do not have a vote in Congress or full autonomy over local issues. And so I urge Congress to finally pass legislation that provides DC residents with voting representation and to take steps to improve the Home Rule Charter.
###

Anything Else, Mr. President?

Thu, 28 Jan 2010 11:57:38 -0800

To say that last night's seventy-plus minute State of the Union address covered a lot of topics is an understatement. President Obama's speech ranged from education to foreign policy, health care to gays in the military. He rebuked the Supreme Court's Citizen's United campaign finance decision (to their face) and welcomed in a new era of civil rights enforcement by his Department of Justice. However, one issue missing from the speech was one that is very important to me, since I live in our nation's capital--DC Voting Rights.

FairVote ally, DC Vote mounted a strong campaign for the past weeks and months to urge the president to educate the nation about the issue of DC Voting Rights in his prime time address. President Obama has long been a strong supporter of giving DC a vote in the House, but he has not used his bully pulpit to bring this issue to the fore. It goes without saying that the president's domestic policy priorities of health care, financial regulation and climate change legislation are important, but increasing the country's awareness of the DC Voting Rights issue would go a long way. Most people outside the beltway would be shocked to learn that there are more than a half million tax-paying citizens with no vote in their federal legislature.

DC Vote held a competition and advocacy campaign before the State of the Union where more than 1,000 people voted on what language the president should use to promote the issue in his speech. I've copied the winning language below as a reminder of what could have been said last night and with the hope that someday these words, or some variation of them, will be spoken by our president.

"Our country fights for democracy and freedom around the globe, including in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the nation's capital, literally within feet of where we sit tonight, 600,000 of our fellow citizens who pay taxes and fight in wars are denied a most fundamental right of democracy. I call upon the Congress to enact long-stalled legislation immediately in order to grant to the citizens of DC full voting rights in the House of Representatives." - Jerry Levine, via e-mail

D.C. City Council Passes Election Omnibus

Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:05:21 -0800

Earlier this week, the D.C. City Council passed the final reading of the sweeping Omnibus Election Reform Act of 2009. Sponsored by council members Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3), Harry Thomas, Jr. (D-Ward 5), and Chairman Vincent C. Gray (D), the bill includes FairVote-backed reforms like pre-registration for 16 and 17-year olds, primary voting for 17-year-olds who will be 18 by the general election, early voting and Election Day registration.

This landmark legislation will make D.C.'s elections among the most progressive and inclusive in the country. In addition to the reforms mentioned above, it also:

sets eligibility requirements for the Board of Elections
gives D.C. employees time off work to vote
creates a check-off box on the voter registration form to volunteer as a poll worker
adds the Department of Corrections and the Department of Youth Rehabilitative Services as voter registration agencies under the National Voter Registration Act
allows no-fault absentee voting
provides expanded opportunities for military and overseas voters to participate in elections
expands transparency and auditability of election results
requires the Board of Elections to submit an automatic voter registration feasibility study by May 2010

Our executive director Rob Richie, a D.C. native, has advocated for the city to take up many of these reforms for nearly a decade. For years, FairVote has argued that the District of Columbia should serve as a model for voting rights, voter access and voter participation. Earlier this year, both Rob and I provided testimony to the Council about how they could improve elections in the District. You can read Rob's testimony here and mine here. In addition, I wrote a commentary about this issue that ran in April in the Washington Post.

For too long, the people of the District have been without a vote in Congress--basically living as second-class citizens in our nation's capital. Members of Congress, most recently Sen. John Ensign (R-NV), have used the District as their own petri dish for policy experimentation. Anything approved by D.C.'s local government is required to have the stamp of approval of 535 representatives who are unelected by the city. This lack of autonomy and democracy continues to subjugate D.C.'s citizens to the political whims of these members of Congress who care more about their political fortunes back home than the people in the city where they serve.

The election reform bill approved by the Council this week should prove to the rest of the country that D.C. is serious about the election process and deserves full voting rights in our national legislature. Improved participation in elections and more involvement in the political process by D.C. residents should also show that the city deserves full autonomy--from decisions about schools to its budget and ultimately to statehood. When the D.C. Board of Elections completes its feasibility study about automatic voter registration next year, I hope the Council will also move to implement a system of universal voter registration, where every citizen is automatically added to the voter rolls.

The reforms passed this week, if approved by the mayor and allowed to stand by Congress, will truly make D.C. a beacon of democracy.

U.S. Senate Approves D.C. Vote

Thu, 26 Feb 2009 00:00:00 -0800

On Thursday, February 26, the U.S. Senate voted 61 to 37 in favor of the DC House Voting Rights Act (S. 160), but added a controversial amendment eliminating most of the District's strict gun control laws. If enacted into law, the House of Representatives would permanently increase its size to 437 members, from 435. Under the legislation, the District of Columbia's Delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton, would receive full voting rights in the U.S. House and Utah would gain another seat because that state is next in line using the 2000 Census. The House is set to take up the measure next week without the gun amendment--any difference between the bills will be reconciled in conference committee. During the 110th Congress, the U.S. House passed the DC Voting Rights Act by a vote of 241 to 177, but the Senate was three votes short of the 60 votes needed for cloture. The bill is expected to pass both chambers and be signed into law by President Obama this year.

[Washington Post Article on Senate Vote]
[Visit our friends at DC Vote]
[More information about the DC House Voting Rights Act of 2009]
[Tell your Senator to Vote "Yes" on S. 160]
[New York Times Editorial]

Senate Minority Blocks D.C. Voting Rights

Tue, 11 Sep 2007 00:00:00 -0700

The Republican minority blocked the U.S. Senate from taking up the D.C. Voting Rights Act of 2007, a historic bill that would have given full voting rights to the citizens of Washington, D.C. Fifty-seven senators voted to end debate and take action on the bill, but fell just short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster organized by Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Minority Whip Trent Lott of Mississippi. This marks the first time Senators have filibustered a voting rights bill since the era of Jim Crow.

The D.C. Voting Rights Act of 2007 was the closest the District has come in nearly 30 years to gaining full voting rights in the U.S. House. Their lone representative, Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, may speak for or against legislation but not vote on the House floor. The bill attracted bi-partisan support, with all but one Democrat and 8 Republicans voting in favor of cloture. FairVote partner, D.C. Vote, will continue to take the lead in securing a vote for the citizens of the District of Columbia.

The D.C. Voting Rights Act of 2007 overwhelmingly passed the U.S. House of Representatives in April, 241-177.

[ Visit our friends at D.C. Vote ]
[ Cartoon from Politico.com ]
[ Washington Post Editorial ]
[ Learn more about D.C. Voting Rights ]

Democracy Denied

Wed, 31 Jan 2007 00:00:00 -0800

The D.C. Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act (H.R. 328 2007) would grant the residents of our nation’s capital an historic voting member in the United States House of Representatives. While a critical step toward giving a voice to District of Columbia residents H.R. 328, however, does not address the problem of the District’s lack of representation in the U.S. Senate. Beyond addressing a serious injustice to Washingtonians, U.S. Senate representation for the District would benefit urban residents around the nation. This is because (1) no U.S. Senator currently represents a majority urban state, as defined as people living in major cities, (2) there is a paucity of past experience with urban governance in the present U.S. Senate and (3) two U.S. Senators can be enough to change a legislative outcome.

Historic Opportunity to Advance DC Voting Rights Act

Tue, 21 Nov 2006 00:00:00 -0800

After historic advances for voting representation for the District of Columbia this past year, advocates are pushing to pass the DC Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act (H.R. 5388) before the close of the year's legislative session. The plan would grant the District voting representation, while adding an additional congressional seat for Utah under a to-be-determined redistricting scheme. Utah lawmakers have sprung into action to create the new map, while President Bush has recently pledged to review the legislation. Meanwhile, the incoming city administration and Democratic House leadership have pledged to support the bill, creating a perfect storm for advancing voting rights this year.

[Get Involved in D.C. Voting Rights Act Action]