The War on Voting Rights: A Recent History

By Nathan Henderson-James

X-Posted to Project Vote's Blog Voting Matters

Steve Rosenfeld, writing in the journal Social Policy, has authored a comprehensive look at the recent history of partisan attacks on the voting process itself and the unfolding attempts to roll back all of the voting rights gains of the past 50 years that have gained speed and urgency under the Bush Administration.  

Pointing out that modern voter suppression attempts and larger projects to reshape the entire electorate to favor conservatives no longer rely on the open fear and intimidation that characterized past practices from American history, Rosenfeld opens his in-depth survey with this observation,

 

"Jim Crow has returned to American elections, only in the 21st century he is apt to be a lawyer carrying a folder filled with briefing papers, proposed legislation and talking points about "voter fraud" and protecting the sanctity of the vote."  

 

The entire article, which Social Policy has placed outside their subscriber wall (pdf), is worth reading in its entirety.

From the article, here's the overall thesis:

 

The newest barriers include state laws that target various phases of the voting process. Registration by individuals has been made more rigorous. Mass registration drives face new deadlines and increased potential fines. Citizens must present new identification to register and to vote, and in some states newly registered voters face increased prospects that partisan challengers will question their credentials before voting. Civil rights groups have noted that all of these new laws and procedures disproportionately fall on people of color, poor people, senior citizens and the disabled.

The Department of Justice, which for decades fought to ensure all eligible citizens could vote, has encouraged states to take these steps in the opposite direction. Political appointees who advocate for stringent requirements before ballots are cast and votes are counted now drive much of the Voting Section's actions. As a result, the Justice Department has been pushing states to purge voter lists, and to adopt newly restrictive voter ID and provisional ballot laws - actions all that are known to cause delays if not confusion at the polls. Meanwhile, the Justice Department's Voting Section has not enforced other federal laws, such as the requirement that state welfare offices offer public aid recipients a chance to register to vote. Similarly, the Bush Justice Department has filed few cases on behalf of minority voters.

The Department's political appointees have also pressured federal prosecutors to pursue "voter fraud" cases against the Bush administration's perceived opponents, such as groups like ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), which conducts mass registration drives among populations that tend to vote Democratic. Two former federal prosecutors have said they believe that they lost their U.S. attorney posts for failing to pursue those cases. The proponents of this renewed impetus to police voters are almost all from a powerful and well-connected wing of the Republican Party that believes steps are needed to protect elections from what they call "voter fraud," or allegations that Democrats - or their allies - are fabricating voter registrations en masse, and voting more than once to win. It is "an article of religious faith that voter fraud is causing us to lose elections," Royal Masset, the former political director of the Republican Party of Texas said in a May 17, 2007 Houston Chronicle report. The report continued, "He [Masset] doesn't agree with that, but does believe that requiring photo IDs could cause enough of a drop off in legitimate Democratic voting to add 3% to the Republican vote."


 

Rosenfeld's piece adds deeper context to the Art Levine piece we highlighted yesterday. Taken together, these two articles show the depth and breadth of recent partisan attempts to shape the electorate and the resulting corruption of independent non-partisan agencies and departments including the Department of Justice itself. They further show the mechanics of those attempts and how they centered largely on ACORN, a national organization fighting for the rights of low- and moderate-income families. (ACORN is also one of Project Vote's field partners in our Voter Participation Program.)



Display:


Florida and Michigan!! (none / 0)

That is why it is so important for us to stick up for the voting rights of Florida and Michigan. Where is Al Gore? Where is Jimmy Carter and his foundation?


Elvis has left the building.
by True Blue Dem on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:47:43 PM EST

Re: Florida and Michigan!! (2.00 / 1)

Umm, I'm not sure that the intra-party conflict over how to select party delegates is quite analagous to the concerted effort of conservatives to disenfranchise poor people and people of color and in the process subvert the entire machinery of voting rights enforcement at the Department of Justice.

Important debate about figuring out who represents a political party? Yes. The same thing as suppressing voters and corrupting Federal law enforcement? Not so much.


by nathanhj on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 04:13:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yep. People seem to confuse those (none / 0)

issues.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 04:31:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Florida and Michigan!! (none / 0)

We were able to vote.  That is why I get so frustrated by the inappropriate use of the word disenfranchised as a description of the primary in either of those states.  In my state of Florida, we were able to vote.  Our votes counted for every single race and every single issue save one.  And we knew about that one going in.

Disenfranchisement on the level that is being described here is wholly different.  It means not being able to vote... period.  Not just one race in one primary... period.  Until you can prove who you say you are.  And once you can do that across the board, they will put up another barrier.  Poll taxes for the 21st century.


Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...
by JenKinFLA on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:05:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The War on Voting Rights: A Recent History (none / 0)

Good diary... very overlooked issue...

Recommended highly!

The American Prospect has the following article as well....

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?arti cle=the_republican_war_on_voting


Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...
by JenKinFLA on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:07:35 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.