09/17/2021
Before the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013, the landmark law was something both parties supported. Republican presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush supported and signed bipartisan laws reauthorizing the Voting Rights Act. But when the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act came before the U.S. House this August, not a single Republican voted in favor.
In my piece from Monday, "On Voting Rights, There Are No Moderates in the GOP,” I highlight what’s changed and why no Republicans in the House or Senate are willing to expand access to voting.
Consequently, when it comes to voting rights, being asked to compromise is typically a warning sign. There is no middle ground between the arsonist and the firefighter. Just as we don’t ask the media to compromise their right to publish news stories, we should not require citizens to compromise their rights as voters.
After considering the For the People Act, S.1, this past summer, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), along with other key Senate Democrats, used the August recess to draft a long-awaited revision of the landmark voting rights bill. The Freedom to Vote Act, introduced on Tuesday, reveals a surprisingly good voting rights bill. It reflects a sobriety and understanding of the challenges facing voters that is worthy of its lofty name. It is not just a reformulation of the prior For the People Act, but in many places, it is an improvement. For a deep dive into the new bill, take a look at my team’s piece, "The Freedom to Vote Act Unpacked" on Democracy Docket now.
Read my latest piece, “My Thoughts on Manchin’s Compromise Bill” here.
Let’s keep up the fight,
Marc
Senate Returns With Compromise Voting Rights Bill
On Tuesday, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) introduced the Freedom To Vote Act, S.2747, a compromise voting rights bill which has been in the works since S.1 was blocked by a Republican filibuster in June. Despite overwhelming support within the Democratic party for S.1, Sen. Manchin remained opposed to the wide-sweeping bill on the principle of bipartisan support. Manchin drafted the proposal for the new compromise bill in close collaboration with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sens. Klobuchar, Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Angus King (I-ME), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.). Senate Majority Leader Schumer indicated he plans to hold a vote on the bill as early as next week.
Read the latest, "The Freedom to Vote Act Unpacked,” for further breakdown of this crucial bill, how it compares to the For the People Act and its path to passage.
States Release Preliminary Redistricting Maps
Ohio — On Sept. 9, the Republican-dominated Ohio Redistricting Commission released a draft plan of state legislative maps, approved by a 5-2 partisan vote. A week later, the Commission approved the maps shortly after their constitutional deadline. To approve state legislative districts for the next 10 years, four of the seven members, including both Democrats, must vote in favor of the maps. Since the maps passed by a party-line vote, with both Democratic members in objection, the maps will only be in effect for four years. The approved maps would maintain the Republican supermajority in the Buckeye state with a projected 63% of House and 70% of Senate seats. The GOP majority justified the maps in a statement by examining the “statewide preferences of voters” and concluding that they predominantly favor Republicans. However, statewide and national races suggest that the breakdown of Republicans and Democrats in the swing state is much more balanced. Gov. Mike DeWine (R) expressed dissatisfaction with both the redistricting process and product and suggested the new maps will face legal challenges. In 2015 and 2018 constitutional amendments, the population voted overwhelmingly in favor of a more independent redistricting process.
Indiana — On Tuesday, the Republican-controlled Indiana state Legislature released the first drafts of the Indiana House and U.S. House maps. Republicans have commanding control of the Indiana General Assembly with 39 of 50 seats in the Senate and 71 of 100 seats in the House. Seven of Indiana's nine representatives in Congress are Republican. However, census data released earlier this summer indicated significant demographic shifts since the last redistricting a decade ago. 49 of Indiana’s 92 counties, all rural, saw notable population declines while growth largely occurred in cities and suburbs, accompanied by an increasing share of non-white residents. During public hearings in August, Hoosiers implored lawmakers to slow down the proposed timeline so they can have more than just a few days to add their input in this once-a-decade process. In Indiana, the state Legislature is responsible for drawing the maps and the governor has veto power; with a Republican trifecta, the maps will likely be approved.
New York — On Wednesday, the New York State Independent Redistricting Commission released two sets of draft U.S. House, state Senate and state Assembly maps. The maps labelled “Letters” were presented by the Commission’s Democratic appointees and “Names” are the Republican-backed maps. “We were not able to come to a consensus on a single map,” said Republican appointee and former state Sen. Jack Martins. “I see our responsibility as members of this commission as putting aside partisan differences … We tried to, and unfortunately it was for naught.” New York lost one seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in the latest reapportionment by the U.S. Census Bureau. In 2014, residents approved a constitutional amendment to establish a ten-member independent commission. The maps will need seven commission votes and are still subject to legislative approval. Reports say statehouse Democrats intend to overrule the commission’s maps in their favor if necessary, and a 2021 ballot initiative would further alter the commission’s procedures by lowering the vote threshold for adoption.
Iowa — The Iowa Legislature released draft proposals for the state’s new legislative and congressional maps on Thursday morning. Under Iowa’s redistricting process, which is unique among the states, the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency is responsible for drafting maps. It’s required to adhere to strict criteria, including geographical compactness, and is not permitted to consider political data. Iowa has seen some of the most competitive U.S. House elections in recent years, with two seats flipping in both 2018 and 2020. Next week, the Temporary Redistricting Advisory Commission (TRAC) will solicit public comments on the proposed redistricting plan at three virtual public hearings. The state Legislature will reconvene on Oct. 5 for a special session to consider the proposals. Under Iowa law, lawmakers do not have the ability to amend the maps — they may only vote to approve or reject them. If the Legislature rejects the proposals, the agency has 35 days to draft a new redistricting plan that the Legislature can again vote to either reject or accept. If the maps are rejected a second time, the agency will draft a third set of proposals that lawmakers will be able to amend. Due to delays in the census, the Iowa Supreme Court has extended the deadline for final approval from Sept. 15 to Dec. 1.
AND MORE:
Litigation on Line-Warming Ban and Felony Enfranchisement
New York — On Tuesday, a federal lawsuit was filed on behalf of the Brooklyn Branch of the NAACP against various New York election officials challenging the state’s line-warming ban, which prohibits nonpartisan groups from providing food and drink to individuals waiting in line to vote. The complaint highlights New York’s history of long wait times at the polls and points out that communities with large Black, brown and elderly populations face disproportionately longer wait times than predominantly white areas. The suit argues that this blanket prohibition on line warming violates the First and 14th Amendments because the law criminalizes protected free speech, burdening the plaintiff’s right to participate in the political process, and it is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague. The plaintiff argues that, if the line-warming ban remains in effect, it “will make it harder—and, in some cases, impossible—for the elderly, disabled, minorities, and poorer communities to exercise their right to vote. Plaintiff aims only to lighten that load, in recognition of the burdens faced by New York’s in-person voters, by providing free food and drink in an expression of solidarity with voters who brave long lines and the elements to be heard.”
North Carolina — The North Carolina Supreme Court has rolled back a recent legal victory that enfranchised individuals with past felony convictions. This order comes after a three-judge panel in a North Carolina trial court ruled in late August that all individuals on probation, parole or a suspended sentence due to a prior felony conviction can immediately register to vote in North Carolina. The state’s Republican-controlled Legislature immediately appealed the decision to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, which paused the preliminary injunction while the case is on appeal. When the plaintiffs petitioned the state Supreme Court, it affirmed the North Carolina Court of Appeals’ ruling, reinstating the previous status quo. The North Carolina Supreme Court did, however, preserve a small victory in its order: Any person who registered to vote between Aug. 23 (the day the trial court issued the amended preliminary injunction) and Sept. 3 (when the North Carolina Court of Appeals paused the injunction) remains “legally registered” to vote and will remain so unless further court action determines otherwise.
Between gerrymandering, voter suppression laws and federal gridlock, defending our democracy can feel overwhelming. But, there are plenty of ways for everyone to take action — here are three things to do today to stay engaged in the fight:
One Week, Three Spotlights: Voter Access in Jails, Virginia’s VRA and More
In Tuesday’s Spotlight, All Voting is Local’s Alex Ault writes about the roughly 750,000 Americans in jails, most of whom are legally allowed to vote but face needless barriers to the ballot. "Existing jail policies and procedures, where they exist at all, are not robust enough to serve voters in jail. As it stands, casting a ballot from jail is extremely difficult. But fixing this system is not," writes Ault. Read his full article, with a specific dive into Pennsylvania’s policies, in “You Still Have the Right to Vote in Jail, But Without Accountability You Won’t Have The Opportunity.”
In Wednesday's Spotlight, Virginia Delegate Marcia S. “Cia” Price and State Senator Jennifer McClellan illustrate how the state of Virginia is stepping up to protect voters 56 years after the passage of the federal Voting Rights Act. In the face of a coordinated and intentional effort to restrict voting rights across the nation, Virginia is taking the opposite approach. On July 1, most provisions of the new Voting Rights Act of Virginia took effect, making Virginia the first state in the South with such a state-level act. In "Virginia Is Leading the Way on Voter Protection", hear directly from the lawmakers who worked to pass a bill that will protect voters from suppression, discrimination and intimidation.
- Make sure to tune in to Twitter Spaces with Marc and Democracy Docket today at 1:30PM ET for a conversation with Price and McClellan. Join the Spaces by going to the @DemocracyDocket Twitter account on your iPhone or Android.
In today's Spotlight, President of End Citizens United and Let America Vote Tiffany Muller praises the compromise federal voting rights bill, highlighting its important provisions to limit the influence of dark money. “We can ensure that all Americans have a say in our democracy,” writes Muller. “That all of us, not just corporate interests, big donors and dark money groups, have a voice in the decisions that affect us and our families.” Read “Manchin Offers a Path Forward on Voting Rights With Compromise Bill” on Democracy Docket now.
Each week, we pick a few reader questions about all things elections and share Marc’s answers. Got a question? Submit it here!
Susie asks: Voting access is essential, but isn’t how we count ballots just as important?
Marc: Absolutely. The right to vote is an illusion if it does not include the right to have it counted accurately. When you examine whose ballots are cast but not counted, you see stark race and age discrepancies. Additionally, in 2020 we saw Donald Trump and his allies try to pressure local officials to not certify results. Unless we act now, this pattern of Republicans challenging throughout the certification process will continue in 2022 and 2024.
Joshua asks: Arizona technically has an independent redistricting process, but it seems to be corrupted by non-independent chairs and strictly partisan votes. What happens in this case?
Marc: Just because a body is labelled an independent commission doesn’t mean it will yield fair results. I care more about the criteria used to draw maps than the process. I am keeping my eye on these “independent” processes where we could see Republican abuse.
“Over one-third of all eligible Black voters live in nine of the country's most competitive states, per Pew Research: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Republicans control the state legislatures in all of those states.” Axios
“Elder’s conspiracy theories echo efforts by Donald Trump to falsely claim the 2020 election was stolen and rigged against him. The language on the website the Elder site linked to appears lifted from a petition circulated to help Trump’s effort to overturn the results of last year’s presidential election.” The Guardian
“In total, state legislators proposed a whopping 581 voting-restriction bills this year — 89 percent of them sponsored by Republicans… The sheer number of bills — both enacted and proposed — really emphasizes what a big priority tightening election laws has become for the GOP since the 2020 election.” FiveThirtyEight
