FairVote Feed: Universal Voter Registration

Learning a Lesson from Egypt’s Universal Voter Registration

Wed, 07 Dec 2011 13:28:06 -0800

Egypt’s first parliamentary election since the ousting of Hosni Mubarak began in certain parts of the country on November 28 and will continue into early next year. The vote is to ultimately fill the 498 seats of the People’s Assembly, the lower house of the legislature, through a combination of proportional representation and winner-take-all runoff elections.

Egypt is experiencing high turnout for a nation that is undergoing such turmoil. One reason is the sentiment that under Mubarak’s rule, voters were denied a political voice. Thus, voters now feel that they have the freedom to express themselves at the polls. Turnout rates were also bolstered by proportional representation, which encourages voters everywhere to vote and helps voters to elect candidates of choice.

There’s another reason for this high turnout, a reason with direct relevance to elections in the United States. Unlike the United States, where as many as three in ten eligible voters are not registered to vote, Egypt this year established a system of universal voter registration. Each citizen has a national identification card. Every individual age 16 years old or older is entered into a national database based on the address on his or her national identification card. That database is used as the national register for voters. Voters who are at least 18 years or older need only show their national identification card at the polls in order to vote.

The effect of this change, approved by Egypt’s Higher Election Committee prior to this year’s election, was not only to grant easier access to those voters in Egypt, but also to those Egyptian voters living abroad. In this current election, all eligible Egyptian expatriates are allowed to vote if there is a polling place established in their respective embassy or consulate. All those Egyptian expatriates who had a national identification card or a passport issued prior to September 27, 2011 are able to vote in this current election. With the ease of registering using only a national identification or passport, hundreds of thousands of Egyptian expatriates registered to vote online prior to the November election.

True, American citizens are not voting next year in the wake of a revolution; yet, there are lessons to be gleaned from the Egyptian experience that are instructive for U.S. elections. Our elections would benefit from a type of “democracy passport” that all Americans would automatically obtain upon becoming citizens. That “passport” need not be a physical piece of paper, but rather a unique identifier that every American citizen would receive for the specific purpose of participating in our democracy.

That kind of universal voter registration system would make it much more likely for us to uphold the goal that votes are only cast by those who are eligible to vote and that voting is not denied to people who are eligible to vote. Our current flawed system neither upholds election integrity nor voter access. Indicative of this flawed system is the fact that millions of Americans have active registrations in more than one jurisdiction, while tens of millions of eligible voters are not even registered to vote.

In contrast, the type of universal registration system created through the use of a “democracy passport” places the burden of registering voters on the government, not on voters themselves. It also modernizes the registration process by eliminating errors inherent in paper registration and creates a standardized system of registration in every state.

Though the details of administering this type of system still need to be developed, it is well within reach, given the realities of modern database technology and systems already in place to give out social security numbers. Seeing brand-new democracies like Egypt soar past the United States in terms of both the access and integrity of its voter registration system is a sobering reminder that the status quo is unacceptable.

Why Settle? A Review of the Conference on “Creating the Voting Rights Act of 2012”

Fri, 04 Nov 2011 08:36:53 -0700

Why Tuesday? held its 2012 election campaign kickoff event on November 7th. The organization, which is famous for travelling the country asking political leaders why America votes on Tuesdays, hosted a program entitled “Creating the Voting Rights Act of 2012.” Why Tuesday? will have every 2012 presidential candidate explain what they would do to improve voter turnout in the United States.

The conference had four panelists who addressed current voting barriers, possible solutions to those barriers, and how voters, particularly young voters, can take action in urging political elites to get serious about electoral reform efforts that combat poor voter participation. The speakers were: Meghan McCain, daughter of 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain; Why Tuesday? Executive Director, Jacob Soboroff; Mimi Marziani, Counsel for the Brennan Center for Justice; and David Becker, Director of the Pew Center on the States Election Initiatives. The moderator was Why Tuesday? Board member Norm Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute.

Mimi Marziani of the Brennan Center began by explaining that state legislatures have severely targeted voting rights today. To date, there are 21 new laws in 14 different states that have decreased the ease of voting. The Brennan Center’s report found that restrictions on acceptable forms of identification at the polls and reduced periods of early voting will likely affect up to five million students, racial minorities, poor, disabled and elderly Americans.

In Texas, for example, a law was recently passed declaring college or university IDs to be invalid forms of identification on Election Day. However, Texas does allow handgun licenses as an acceptable ID. Looking at the statistics provided by the Brennan Center, we find that African American students make up 17% of the university population in Texas. But only 7.5% of African Americans in the state of Texas have handgun licenses. This law puts students, especially those who are studying out-of-state, at a potential disadvantage in successfully casting their ballot on Election Day.

In Florida, a civics teacher who was helping her students register to vote (doing something FairVote has backed strongly in making use of the state’s new law-- one passed with bipartisan support- allowing 16-year-olds and 17-year-olds to “pre-register” to vote) now faces thousands of dollars in fines because she was not in compliance with Florida’s new election law. Florida’s new law on voter registration makes it harder for third party organizations to aid eligible citizens in registering to vote.

Those in favor of these restricting election laws say it is voter fraud that has driven them to make these changes. But opponents of these laws, like Norm Ornstein, explained that the claims being made about voter fraud at the polls is virtually non-existent.

Whether these new laws now seen as suppressing voter turnout are the product of political motives, or whether they are guided by a desire to protect the right that so many Americans hold dear, it is clear that modernizing voter registration is a better way to safeguard the right to vote. One out of every nine Americans moves each year, and that amount is double among young people. We live in a technologically advanced society, yet the question still remains, why are voter registration procedures still functioning within the confines of the 19th and 20th centuries?

The United States is just about the only major democracy that puts the burden of voter registration on the voters. If voter registration information is shared between states, updated by the states, managed online, and is operated on an opt-out basis rather than an opt-in basis, it would take away that burden put on voters. It would also reduce problems that arise when election officials receive waves of new forms due to a mobile society right before the deadline, and would eliminate the struggle of trying to read illegible handwriting on paper applications.

Solutions such as the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) and state-run automatic registration when eligible citizens turn 18 years old will help alleviate some of the costs of voting. There are many brilliant ideas on how to fix our voting system that have surfaced from both electoral reform organizations and unaffiliated voters alike. But with a country in the midst of a debt crisis and an economy slow to bounce back, it is hard to get political leaders to see the importance in reforming the current electoral system. The ability to choose the few people who are tasked with making decisions on behalf of the many is important, and that selection process should not be looked at as insignificant by those leaders themselves.

Here’s how FairVote suggests you can get involved!

-If you are a student or know a student, have them take advantage of any poll worker opportunities in your community
- Voice your views on the importance of voter participation by using email, or through free social media outlets such as Facebook and Twitter
- Have discussions with those you know about why you are a voter, how meaningful it is to participate in choosing who represents and speaks for you in government
- Be ready to work for structural reforms to our electoral process. When we are in a position to cast meaningful votes in contested elections, we can expect voter turnout to rise.
-Show appreciation for your ability to vote by going to the polls on Election Day!

Stay tuned for FairVote doing a lot more to make it easier to get involved in these activities.

Voter Fraud: Let's Modernize Voter Registration First

Fri, 07 Oct 2011 07:52:36 -0700

The Heritage Foundation held a conference on October 6 entitled, “The Constitution and the Right to Vote: Protecting Against Voter Fraud.” Expert panelists discussed issues regarding voter fraud in the U.S. and the increasing need for voter ID laws.

John Fund, author and columnist for the Wall Street Journal, began his speech by talking about the latest municipal election in Albuquerque, New Mexico on October 4. Albuquerque adopted a law requiring voters to show identification at their polling locations. Reported by KRQE News 13, Albuquerque voters showed up in high numbers to vote on Tuesday. Mr. Fund made the point that any beliefs about voter turnout being depressed as a result of voter ID laws are non-other than “dubious,” citing Albuquerque’s successful election as an example despite its voter ID law.

Fund is right that having voter ID laws don't prevent relatively high turnout, as was also true in states like Indiana and Georgia that had voter ID during the 2008 presidential elections. But KRQE News 13 was pointing out the reason voter turnout was so high was because Mayor R.J. Berry’s bond package was on the ballot. The plan to spend $25-million on a new sports complex during economic times where every dollar counts was not something that resonated well with many voters.

In addition to this anomaly in voter turnout, Albuquerque’s voter ID law was passed in 2005. The immediate effects of a law like this would be much harder to see six years after its implementation. It also doesn't change the fact that certain eligible voters may not have voted due to the law.

Turning to questions about voter fraud, Hans von Spakovsky, a Senior Legal Fellow for The Heritage Foundation’s Legal and Judicial Studies, used Wake County (NC) as an example of a location where three people voted twice in a recent election. What was not said about the three people, was information regarding their lack of knowledge concerning voting procedures. After telling a poll worker on Election Day that they had already voted once under North Carolina’s rules for early voting, they cast a second ballot to “make sure their vote counted.” In a county where 440,000 votes were cast in the 2008 presidential elections, three people violating the law in such an apparently non-malicious way is obviously not many.

This is not to dismiss in the least the importance of maintaining fair elections, but in the case of voter ID laws, having photo identification in this instance would not have kept these people from voting twice. It would have confirmed they were the person they said they were, matching the voter’s appearance with the picture on the card and providing an in-state address, doing nothing to provide a solution for what was a lack of voter education.

It is safe to say that the U.S. electoral system has its flaws. It is also clear that the Heritage Foundation favors voter identification laws as a way to reform the often inaccurate registration rolls. States do not have an effective method of sharing information across state borders to account for the abundance of mobility within the country and election boards increasingly go without the manpower necessary to run tip top elections. But, America already has the lowest turnout rates in comparison to other modernized democracies, and state governments already require voters to jump through many hoops in order to register and vote. If a voter ID law is to be pursued anyway, safeguards need to be built in that it doesn’t lead to eligible voters being denied their right to vote.

Other advocacy organizations have provided their own solutions to fixing inaccurate voter rolls. The Brennan Center believes one way to fix voter registration is to make it permanent, preventing voters from being taken off registration lists even if they move. The Pew Center on the States has already produced a program called the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), where the responsibility of updating and getting voters on registration rolls will be left up to the states.

FairVote is open to many suggestions that will modernize voter registration in our support for full and accurate voter rolls. We are particularly interested in the idea of a national system grounded in every eligible voter automatically and efficiently receiving a "Democracy Passport." This would be a unique national government identifier that would systematically register every eligible citizen and update voter registration rolls.

FairVote also supports the establishment of a federal standard that all states must meet to make sure eligible citizens are registered to vote. Still, it will be left up to the voters to decide whether they will accept the solutions state governments believe will solve this problem, and it is the voters who will determine if they think it is right for them to take on the extra burdens of problems that are institutional in nature, an institution that is in dire need of reform.

Modernizing Voter Registration: An Overview of the American Enterprise Institute Conference

Tue, 06 Sep 2011 10:26:44 -0700

The American Enterprise Institute held a conference on September 19th discussing the ways in which states currently handle voter registration and ways to improve it. Two groups of electoral reform experts, each with three panelists, plunged into discourse regarding the complications of current voter registration systems and possible solutions to ameliorate how citizens go about registering to vote.

A few key points were made clear about why voter registration is even necessary. Looking back on the history of elections, there once was a time when elections were more or less debates over the candidates, and eligible voters able to participate cast their vote by orally stating the candidate they supported. This method of voting was prone to be rigged with fraud, intimidation to vote for a specific candidate, and even riots, as there was no way to ensure that only those people who met the requirements to vote were the ones actually voting. Voter registration was introduced in part as a way to validate eligible voters while also keeping those who were not eligible away from the polls.

Maintaining accurate registration rolls has been a difficult task for many states. For example, it is easy to look at the way European countries handle voter registration and question why the U.S. does not share in the same success stories as Europe— having significantly higher rates of citizens registered to vote and lower rates of errors in the voter rolls.

One reason is that the United States is unique in having such an extremely mobile population. As stated by Charles Stewart III, professor of Political Science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, within a four year time span, 85 million people move throughout the United States, with 45 million changes of address. That is a lot of people to track, and with each state having its own regulations about voter registration, citizens may not be informed about that information and may be unaware that they must update their voter registration in compliance with the laws of the new state in which they reside.

Accompanying this burden of citizens taking the initiative to keep their voter registration up to date is poor record-keeping by some states. Since the 2000 presidential election especially, states have been much more cautious about purging voters from the rolls in order to avoid accidentally getting rid of voters who are still eligible.

The Director of Elections for the state of Ohio, Matthew Damschroder, highlighted three problems that hurt state Board of Elections the most.

•First, most of the country still relies on paper-based methods of registration forms. –This brings the complication of trying to read the hand-writing of citizens. If an election official entering the registration information into the computer system cannot read the hand-writing, and inputs a misspelled name, for example, this can cause major problems when that voter shows up to vote on Election Day.

•Second, registration information is unverifiable by the voter.—Often times, citizens send off their registration form and simply hope for the best. It is not standard practice in every state to have citizens verify that the information election commissions have in their system is in fact correct.

•Third, the current registration system is dependent on “third parties” (not political parties, but independent associations).—People from various organizations get eligible voters to fill out registration forms that those third parties will then drop off to election boards for the applicant. This is not always reliable. In Ohio, a woman working for a third party entity had five-hundred registration forms sitting in the back seat of her car, along with her laptop. When her car was broken into, the thief not only stole her laptop, but made off with the registration forms as well, seemingly useless items that were then discarded in a dumpster. The registration forms were found the day after the registration deadline, and hundreds of eligible citizens who thought they were registered showed up on Election Day to find out that they in fact were not, thus losing their ability to vote.

In light of the many factors like these that signal a registration system in distress, there is some hope to having a better voter registration system. The Pew Center on the States announced a new approach to reforming the registration system. Pew brought together 42 technical experts, academics, and election officials from 21 states to produce a plan for better handling voter registration. The result was the Electronic Registration Information Center, or ERIC, where data on people who may be a new voter or may be moving can easily be shared between states. ERIC would allow states to update records on existing voters and get rid of duplicate and invalid records from state files.

Here’s a reminder about FairVote’s stance on modernizing voter registration. We believe:

States should establish means to automatically place eligible voters on registration rolls, ideally based on a unique national government identifier- a kind of “Democracy Passport.”

The federal government should establish minimum standards that all states must meet to ensure all eligible voters are registered and that provide a means to establish a more nationally coherent voter roll.

States should establish a standard pre-registration age of 16, actively (and perhaps automatically) registering citizens in their high schools and at the DMV in conjunction with a voting curriculum that will prepare first-time voters to vote as soon as they turn 18 years old.

To learn more about FairVote’s position on voter registration visit Universal Voter Registration, and click here to watch the full broadcast of AEI’s Bringing Voter Registration into the 21st Century conference.

The Next Generation of Reformers: Reasons for Young People to Get Involved in the Electoral Reform Movement

Wed, 24 Aug 2011 11:01:17 -0700

According to The Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement, an estimated 24% of all eligible young people ages 18-29 voted in the 2010 midterms – in contrast to 51% of eligible voters over 30. Historically, we’re a group that gets ignored a lot by political campaigns and pollsters. The chicken or egg question of youth voter turnout is usually: Do young people not vote because campaigns ignore them, or do campaigns ignore them because we don’t vote?

The 2008 election seemed to prove that young people do vote if they see a reason to participate and are reached out to. The same is true for young people in nonpartisan movements like the environmental movement and organizations like Invisible Children that deal with international conflicts. Young people, especially of the millennial generation, will get excited and involved in elections and organizations if they are specifically targeted.

A lot of the people advocating for structural changes do so because we have problems with the established political culture. The group of people that is 18-29 right now has a lot of reasons to want deep systemic change soon. Because of this, I think that over the next decade we will see groups that are focused on young people intensify their advocacy efforts for election reform issues. Here’s why:

Millennials are more likely not to identify strongly with either party, which means we will want to take advantage of reforms like Ranked Choice Voting. Ranked Choice Voting means that voters don’t have to worry about a “spoiler effect” if they vote for a candidate who’s not polling in the top two spots. It also makes for less divisive campaigning.

We’re very transient, so we benefit from policies like Same Day Registration and Universal Voter Registration. If you move to a state that has different election laws or have to move suddenly, you might miss the deadline to register. These policies mean that no one will be disenfranchised because of a location change.

We’re the most diverse generation ever in America, so we want policies that will treat everyone equally, and are more willing to see the reality of inequality in our country. That could lead to interest in proportional voting systems that elect representatives who better reflect voters.

A lot of us are going to be in debt for the majority of our lives, so any policies that simulate a poll tax like photo ID laws is something that won’t fly with us -- especially when such policies make it more difficult for students to vote.

We’re used to having to figure out new technologies quickly and are used to adapting to the newest model, so registering to vote online and having better voting machines is not something we would shy away from. But we also know the limits of technology, so we will be supportive of checks on election systems, like paper ballots and election audits.

Being smart is cool- not only can we be a more informed electorate, we can be more informed about the system’s current deficiencies. Efforts to improve civic education can heighten awareness.

For instance, these organizations that focus on young people have recently advocated for voting rights and other structural changes:

In 2010, The Bus Project in Portland, OR campaigned against the repeal of the local municipal public-option campaign financing law. The Bus Project’s main objective is to get young people more involved in politics.

League of Young Voters in Portland, ME is crusading against the repeal of Election Day Registration in Maine as we speak. Young people are one of the biggest demographics that Election Day Registration helps, although certainly not the only. Last year the Leauge of Young Voters was involved in advocating for an elected Mayor in Portland and Ranked Choice Voting, both of which are being implemented for the first time this fall, and pushed hard for a nearly successful effort to allow residents who are legal immigrants to vote in city elections.

Young people are also defending their rights at a time when many citizens’ rights are under attack. In New Hampshire, there was a recent attempt to disenfranchise students in the form of an unconstitutional bill in the legislature that sought to bar students originally from out of state from voting in New Hampshire. Students from different colleges in New Hampshire went to the mattresses, and defended the rights of students to vote through protest, testifying in the State Legislature, and reaching out to media.

Students at Yale advocated for National Popular Vote in Connecticut and testified before the Election Laws Committee. Students all over the country are advocating for NPV and making an impact.

Voter pre-registration is a policy that is most effectively advocated for by the people it affects- young people ages 16 and 17, or people that were recently high school age. The Rhode Island Young Democrats successfully advocated for voter pre-registration in their state, which has been in effect since early 2010.

Groups like this mean that the next generation of election reformers is already active. But if we want to capitalize on all the reasons why this particular group should be calling for reforms like Ranked Choice Voting, Right to Vote, Pre-registration, and more, we need to make sure our message is reaching them.

Rossello v. United States and the Right to Vote for Puerto Rico

Thu, 30 Jun 2011 12:02:11 -0700

During a week in which we celebrate the American colonies for seeking independence in large part due to denial of representation in the British parliament, it’s time for us to have a candid conversation about voting rights in our own present day “colonies”, starting with the American territory of Puerto Rico.

Brought in the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights by former governor of Puerto Rico Pedro Rossello, Rossello v. United States addresses the lack of a right to cast a ballot and have such ballots counted in national elections for president and Congress by residents of Puerto Rico. Petitioner Rossello has been disenfranchised, along with all other residents of Puerto Rico, despite his American citizenship, based solely on his area of residence within the United States. Currently, any American moving their residence to Puerto Rico would similarly be disenfranchised. This glaring discrimination against United States citizens living in Puerto Rico cannot be allowed to continue under international law and FairVote fully supports Rossello in his efforts.

The United States government is improperly denying the ability to vote to at least 3.7 million of its citizens in stating that the Resident Commission non-voting member of Congress is sufficient to address Puerto Rico’s needs. It is simply not reasonable to believe that one non-voting representative to Congress is equivalent to two senators, approximately six members of the House of Representatives, and a vote for the president and a vice president. The residents of Puerto Rico are being systematically disenfranchised and relegated to second class citizenship by their own government.

Puerto Rico’s current disenfranchised status is not acceptable. Unemployment in Puerto Rico is over 16% - grotesquely high even in an area where unemployment is always higher than that of the mainland. Residents of Puerto Rico pay the same social security and Medicaid taxes as mainlanders; however, they generally receive about 93% less in Medicaid coverage, something many believe is due to Puerto Rico’s inability to lobby for itself in Congress. Puerto Rico is hemorrhaging over 35,000 people a year and those who do leave are usually the highest educated, highly skilled, young, and Republican. In short, not having a voice at the national level is having a real effect on four million American lives.

Failing to provide basic suffrage rights to Puerto Rico is particularly ironic in a time of way when Puerto Rican Americans serve in our armed services at higher rates than most of our states. Petitioner claims that no other area of the United States suffered so many casualties of war prior to becoming a state as Puerto Rico has, or had more decorated and high ranking service members. Puerto Rican soldiers can be ordered into battle by a Commander in Chief for whom they have no power to vote.

And yet all evidence demonstrates that Puerto Ricans greatly value suffrage rights. Voter turnout in election for governor of Puerto Rico are higher than the gubernatorial election of any governor in the United States. In fact, 81% of the 2.4 million registered voters went to the polls in 2004, and Puerto Ricans make Election Day a holiday for their elections.

Voting rights in other American "colonies" differ. The phrase “the Constitution does not follow the flag” is often tossed around during this conversation to justify the varying levels of right in territories held by the United States. Additionally, “territory” is a broad term. For example, Americans living in American Samoa are U.S. nationals, but not U.S. citizens. The U.S. Virgin Islands require American citizens from the mainland to go through customs. Guam’s constitutional has never been approved by the Unites States Congress. People with residence in any territory, including Guam, the Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands and American Samoa all have no right to vote for national representatives, in the form of a voting member of Congress or a elector vote for the U.S. President.

The political leaders of an American territory should not have to sue their own country in an international court in order to be heard as full citizens. But the series of cases controlling Puerto Rico’s status are racist (written by the same court as Plessy v. Ferguson) and a national embarrassment. Under the current system, without a right to vote in the national government, the discrimination against American citizens living in its colonies/territories will continue. For that reason, FairVote supports the efforts of Rossello on behalf the 3.7 million disenfranchised Puerto Ricans in his attempt to gain the voting right he is due as an American citizen.

President Obama’s recent visit to Puerto Rico was the first such state visit since one by President John Kennedy, and even that first-in-a-half-century visit was seen by many analysts as primarily a means to raise campaign funds and appeal to Puerto Ricans living in the continental United States. The president's pledge to support the will of Puerto Ricans should they vote on statehood again ("When the people of Puerto Rico make a clear decision, my administration will stand by you.") is welcome—but no substitute for immediately seeking means to address the broader problem of how we treat American citizens living in Puerto Rico.

The Constitutional Right to Vote Blog: Rock the Blog!

Mon, 13 Jun 2011 11:16:26 -0700

The last Constitutional amendment (aside from the 27th amendment which started its ratification process in the late 1700s) was the 26th amendment. Ratified in 1971, it states that “The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.” While the language is intended to serve young people well, it still leaves open a loophole in Constitutional law- while young people cannot be discriminated against based on their age, they can be denied the chance to vote, or have their ability to vote abridged, for reasons that can also undercut voting rights for older citizens.

As demonstrated by the new Rock the Vote report, the 2011 Voting System Scorecard, we still have significant progress to make to better include 18-25 year olds in our elections. Perhaps more glaringly, the report indicates that less than 59% of young people (defined as 18-25 years old) are even registered to vote; this makes young people the segment of the US population least likely to be registered. Of those registered or eligible to be registered, many report difficulty understanding the processes.

The report works like this: it breaks down a series of areas related to voting, and gives each state a score in each of these areas. Topics include

registration (with scores for automatic registration, portable registration, online, same-day, and third party) for a possible area-total of 11 points,
voting (identification requirements, convenience, residency, absentee, overseas/military) with a possible area-total of 7 points,
and preparation (civic lessons, pre-registration) with a possible area-total of 3 points.

All together, the highest possible score is 21 points. Information on each sub-topic used to evaluate a state was collected from a variety of sources including FairVote, the Brennan Center, Demos, PEW, CIRCLE, the Fair Elections Legal Network, and several others.

Even the state with the highest score (Washington) received only a total of 14.2 or 68%. This score was based on a number of practices Rock the Vote endorses like online voter registration. States tied for the lowest score (South Carolina and Virginia) received an abysmal 3.8, or 18% of the total possible score. Some states such as California, Delaware and Maryland all received perfect scores in one area (“preparation”) but had room for improvement in other areas.

North Dakota was largely excluded from the report, since the state has no voter registration requirement. As a lack of voter registration requirements is often seen as a benefit to young people, Rock the Vote determined to discuss North Dakota as if full points had been given in the areas related to registration and pre-registration. If the state was therefore given full

points in these topics it would have a score of over 80%, more than 20% above any other state in the country, bumping North Dakota into the top-spot.
While this report shows many states making progress towards goal of more inclusive voting system, it is instructive about the case for reform that the highest score received was only 68%; a score that is barely passing.

Many states scored 0 points in the preparation section, which includes civic education and voter pre-registration. FairVote has taken a lead role in promoting good practices in this area. FairVote has been a national leader in promoting voter preregistration for young adults soon to be eligible to vote as a means to encourage voter registration in schools and at the DMV; we’ve taken a lead in securing it in recent years in Delaware, Florida, Maryland, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Washington, D.C. as detailed here. States where voter pre-registration bills are pending include New York and Massachusetts.

Rock the Vote reports that nationally less than 4% of 12th grade students were performing “above level” in civics classes; more than 60% are performing at a “basic” level. It is no wonder then that so many young people are registering to vote in the wrong way or at the wrong time. (For more information on FairVote’s civic lessons for students, please visit here). For related resources , see FairVote links on civic education ,an interactive map on registration,blogs related to the topic and pending legislation on voting reform.

Youth voting’s abysmal turn out numbers involve more than issues with pre-registration and civic learning, of course. Many problems arise when young mobile persons want to vote, but find themselves unable to obtain a ballot. As highlighted by the Rock the Vote report, this is often because some young people become most interested in a campaign close to an election, at time at which many states’ registration deadlines have long since passed. In fact, Rock the Vote found that 15% of people who tried to use their online voter registration form in 2008 did so after the deadline for the upcoming election, and 10,000 tried to register to vote on Election Day! Without same day voter registration, and easy-to-use absentee voting procedures, 18-25 year olds are often left out of the pool of eligible voters

Yet, in light of the difficulties involved with youth mobilization, Rock the Vote contends that 30 states have tried to pass or have passed legislation in the past year which would actually make it more difficult for young people to register and to vote.

Such legislation include requiring a state issued ID in order to vote, proposals to eliminate same day voter registration, and plans as radical as New Hampshire’s failed proposal to limit voting among college students to those whose parents lived in that community prior to the student attending college to avoid students “voting their feelings”.

Overall, what reports like Rock the Vote’s highlight are the needs for more comprehensive programs to educate voters and potential voters as to what options are available when registering and learning about civics in their area. However, such efforts will most effective if paired with efforts to reform current systems to become more inclusive for all citizens, easier for voters to understand, and streamlined. It’s very telling even the highest performing states received scores that no student would ever want to find on a report card.

More broadly, while the 26th amendment was a giant step forward for young people, the Rock the Vote report underscores the fact that it didn’t establish an absolute constitutional right to vote for young adults; rather, it gave them the all-too-tenuous level of voting rights provided to older citizens. Without a more affirmative right to vote in the Constitution it’s too easy for states to make decisions that undercut our voting rights – for people of any age, but often with the greatest impact on young adults.

The Right to Vote Blog: The Root Cause of Maryland Voter Registration Failures

Fri, 04 Mar 2011 14:22:21 -0800

What if you thought you had gone through the process of making sure you could vote, but later were denied the chance to do so on Election Day? According to a recent Baltimore Sun inv estigation, that very situation is exactly what has been happening to tens of thousands of Marylanders. The Sun found that some 25% of all the Marylanders who, during the past four years, tried to register to vote at the Maryland Motor Vehicles Agency (MVA) offices were never properly recorded in voter registration logs, leaving them ineligible to vote.

MVA officials justified these numbers by blaming the applicants, saying many did not fill out forms properly. A spokesperson claimed it was enough to “offer the opportunity to start the process” and that “we [the MVA] do what we're federally required to do under the motor voter law." However, under the Motor Voter law, a MVA is required to help voters register, not merely have forms available. It is a certainty that when the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA, or “motor voter”) law was passed, the assumption was eligible voters who registered at the MVA would actually get… registered.

It is simply unacceptable that at least 144,442 people in Maryland believed they had registered to vote but were never registered, without being informed of the problem. A disproportionate percentage of the people who were never properly processed were from Baltimore and Prince George’s County – areas with large numbers of racial minorities. Former Department of Justice voting rights chief John Tanner pointed out in a Sun commentary that the MVA may not only be in violation of the NVRA, but the Voting Rights Act as well.

While long lines of disgruntled people at the overburdened MVA are an unfortunate reality, it is undeniable there is a serious issue with voter registration in Maryland when such a large number of citizens can be left disenfranchised. If we had a goal of universal voter registration where every eligible voter was registered to vote and no ineligible voter was registered to vote, this situation would of course be avoided. Tanner suggests that Maryland move to automatic voter registration procedures where “every qualified customer of the MVA or a public assistance or disability services office automatically goes on the list of citizens eligible to vote.” Duplications and omissions on the voter rolls would be eliminated and citizens would have the security in knowing that the time they take off from work to vote will not be time wasted.

Short of uuniversal adult voter registration, there are other more immediate ways to improve Maryland’s voter registration system. For example, Delaware is among the states that have created innovative (and relatively inexpensive) technology-based systems that cut down on human error by cutting down on the amount of people that handle each applicant’s information. In Delaware an applicant sends the information directly from a computer to the database, eliminating the ability for paperwork to be separated, lost or mishandled in the process. This also solves the concern over incomplete applications, as the computer system can quickly prompt applicants for missing information, and send a confirmation letter when each application is complete. Applicants under a technology based system immediately know if they are registered and, since the information is actually handled by fewer people and goes directly into a database to verify the registration, the possibility for fraud and identity theft is reduced.

Other improvements that could produce more options for voters are systems such as same day voter registration, which allows voters who are not registered prior to the election to vote and register on the same day. Already in place in several states, this system often increases overall voter turnout.

Ultimately, however, we don’t do a portion of what should be done to improve voting because we have not committed to an affirmative right to vote under the U.S. Constitution. Right now, there is no guarantee the disenfranchised Marylanders would have had their vote counted even if it was properly cast. Many adult citizens in Maryland can’t even legally register due to prior felony convictions – and may not even be aware that even attempting to register could get them into new trouble. Because we lack a right to vote, it is possible that the votes in a city like Baltimore and the votes in a city like Annapolis will continue to be handled in completely different fashions, with different protections for the voter.

For the moment, Marylanders are right to feel wary of relying on their registration at the MVA. Anyone who is unsure as to the status of their Maryland registration can search here to find information on the status of their application.

Three Steps to a Smart Vote for the Upcoming Election

Thu, 14 Oct 2010 09:43:01 -0700

At FairVote, we acknowledge elections can sometimes be confusing. As voters, we occasionally need to check the rules, too. However, with a few good resources voting does not need to be intimidating. Below are three steps to make your vote count.

Step 1: Make sure you are registered to vote.

Before you vote for the first time in any state, you need to register to vote, and with midterm elections quickly approaching, many registration deadlines are too. Deadlines vary from state to state. In some states, the time to register to vote has already passed, but in many states it still is not too late. Some states will even allow you to register when you go to vote at your polling station on Election Day. As a result, the most important step to registering is familiarizing yourself with your state laws.

An easy way to register to vote is visiting your municipal office. You can also mail in your registration form. Some states even let you register online so you do not need to mail anything in. Also, if you think you already are registered, it is always a good idea to double check.

Below are a several websites that will help you find your state laws and walk you through the steps of filling out the registration forms:

http://www.register-vote.com/
http://www.rockthevote.org/
http://www.credomobile.com/registertovote/

And here are some websites to visit if you have any questions about your state’s specific election policies:

http://www.eac.gov/
http://electionland.com/

Step 2: Educate yourself about the candidates and issues.

We know a lot of different external pressures exist before elections—your family, friends, teachers, and the media. However, you are the one who is soley responsible for how you vote.

That’s the beauty of democracy; your vote is your voice. Listen to every point of view, because partisan bickering is overrated. Be open-minded, and educate yourself about the candidates and issues. A good vote requires a good state of mind.

Finding information about candidates and institutions can sometimes seem like work, but here are some helpful nonpartisan websites that would be a good way to start your search:

http://www.votesmart.org/
http://www.congress.org/
http://smartvoter.org/
http://www.c-span.org/

Also, you might be one of the fortunate ones to live in a state with an official state-financed voter guide. Check the websites of your state board of elections and/or Secretary of State to see what might be available.

Step 3: Go Vote!

You have done all the work. Now, it is time for your voice to be heard. The easiest way to vote is by going to your local polling station, which you can find by calling your municipal or state election offices or by consulting their websites. Newspapers often also publish the information, too. If you don’t think you can make it to the polls on Election Day there are still several options. Many states offer early voting, so you can stop by their local offices and vote a few weeks in advance. States also offer absentee ballots. However, you need to apply in advance to get these, so if you want to use one, you need to plan ahead. Once again, each state has different laws about these procedures, so familiarize yourself with your state’s rules so you have time to prepare.

Here are some websites that can help you find your polling place or get an absentee ballot:

http://www.vote411.org/
http://www.longdistancevoter.org/
http://www.fvap.gov/

The next election is on November 2nd. It is the midterm election, so be prepared and don’t miss it!!

Re Registering to Vote After Moving Out of State

Wed, 15 Sep 2010 14:27:44 -0700

Recently, I moved from New York to Virginia. I had been a New York resident my entire life, remaining a New York voter even when I lived in Pennsylvania during college, I intended to remain a New York voter until the most recent election cycle was over; having moved to Virginia less than a month ago, I knew very little about most of the candidates here.

A practical question arose this afternoon: how long after you move should you change your voter registration? Obviously, a voter should be registered where s/he actually lives and gets mail, but when should the voter make the switch? Can you wait a week? A month? A year?

The answered turned out to be a bracing one. According to www.eac.gov, “Most states allow a 60-day grace period for you to be able to vote using your old address.” The governing law is the law of the state you moved away from. This means for me, I am beholden to New York law.

Not finding the information I wanted online, I called my former-local Board of Elections, where I had registered as a teenager and always requested my absentee ballots. Under state law, I was told, you don’t get a 60 day grace period. I had moved, and now I have no choice but to register as a Virginia voter for this election.

Of course, this mandate does not apply to college students and other people who are in a transitional period in their lives, who are allowed to continue to be a registered voter at their permanent address, most likely their parent’s address.

But now that I am no longer a student, I’m not in that category. With the elections only about a month away, this means that people who have moved recently may need to print out and mailing in their new voter registration forms this weekend. Many states require a voter to register four weeks before an election to vote. With a November 2nd election this year that means the deadline in those states is just a few days away. For me, Virginia requires a voter to register 21 days prior to an election, so I can get my registration by October 12.

The registration problem would, of course, be alleviated altogether if there existed Election Day registration (EDR) system in place. If EDR was available, anyone who had moved immediately prior to an election would be able to arrive at their local precinct and register to vote in their new home. Without it, voters can be left in limbo between two states, unable to voter in their old home but missing an early deadline to vote in their new home.

We also might have more automatic registration procedures in place. I’ve done various things since coming to Virginia that could have triggered an update to my voter registration - -or at least a mailing alerting me to the need to update registration.

But in lieu such reforms, we must subscribe to the as they are. If you have moved recently, don’t forget to re-register to vote as soon as possible. Registration forms are available in many places, including post offices and online at your state’s Board of Elections website. Find out more at this helpful Election Assistance Commission website: http://www.eac.gov/voter_resources/ive_moved_recently_can_i_still_vote.aspx