|
|
|
Election News BriefsJoe “the Plumber” Wurzelbacker? Wurzebacher? Wurzelbacher? .Published in: Brennan Center for Justice October 16, 2008Written by: Maggie Barron Posted On: 10/28/2008 Click for printable PDF version By Maggie Barron, Joe the Plumber appeared in last night's debate as a symbol of Ohio's "everyman." He is also now a symbol of the "everyman" whose name is misspelled in government databases. Or, for voter-fraud enthusiasts, an example of yet another type of voter who should be challenged or removed from the rolls. After his debut on the national stage as a skeptical swing voter, reporters checking up on Joe could not find his voter registration record. That's because his last name, Wurzelbacher, is misspelled in state databases. According to the latest ruling from Ohio, the 200,000 newly registered voters whose names do not match government databases will have their names turned over to local election officials, where they will be at risk of being illegally removed from registration lists, or challenged at the polls on Election Day. These 200,000 voters make up one third of all of Ohio's new registrations since January. Normally, when new registrants' information does not match, the state takes further steps to verify them and correct errors. This ruling bypasses that process and delivers lists of mis-matches directly to local elections offices. According to today's New York Times, "[o]nce the local officials have the names, they may require these voters to cast provisional ballots rather than regular ones, and they may ask partisan poll workers to challenge these voters on Election Day." Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner has filed an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court. Fortunately, Joe has voted before, so his registration appears not to be at risk. But for the 200,000 others, these data-entry errors could mean they may face major challenges on Election Day. http://www.brennancenter.org/blog/archives/joe_the_plumber_wurzelbacker_wurzebacher_wurzelbacher/#When:16:44:00Z Contact Email: mmacm@macmu.com NATIONAL GROUP CONDEMNS UNLAWFUL PURGING PRACTICES IN MICHIGANPublished in: Advancement ProjectWritten by: Advancement Project Newsletter Posted On: 8/20/2008 Click for printable PDF version MICHIGAN - Advancement Project has attempted to get Michigan Secretary of State Terry Land and State Elections Bureau Director Chris Thomas to cease practices that violate federal and state election laws and impede voting, but the state has not responded positively. As a result, Advancement Project has taken these matters to the public arena. Through op-eds and media alerts earlier this month, Advancement Project notified newspaper editors throughout Michigan that massive numbers of state residents could be disenfranchised because of Land's improper policies. Through research and discussions with its local coalition partners - the Michigan Election Reform Alliance (MERA), NAACP, and ACORN -- Advancement Project determined that Michigan was conducting a series of unlawful purge programs. For example, when the Michigan Department of State learns a voter has obtained a driver's license in another state, it immediately cancels the voter's registration and instructs the city or township clerk to issue a cancellation notice after the voter has been removed from the voter rolls. According to the Department's own estimations, more than 280,000 voters are removed from the rolls in this manner, annually. But this violates federal law. The National Voter Registration Act of 1993, commonly known as the "Motor Voter" law, prohibits states from removing voters unless the removal arises from the specific request of the voter, a criminal conviction or mental- incapacity determination related to the voter, death or change in the voter's residence. If the removal is the result of a change of residence, federal law requires the state or local election official to issue confirmation of registration notices first, before removing voters from the rolls. Another state election law instructs city and township clerks to immediately reject the applications of new voters who are otherwise qualified to vote whenever their original voter identification cards are returned by the post office as undeliverable. Officials in Detroit estimate that approximately 30,000 voters per year are removed from the rolls in that city alone because of a returned postcard. Advancement Project has also found that Secretary Land is adding to existing voting barriers by requiring election officials to issue provisional ballots for any voter who does not look like the photo on their identification--even though state law does not allow provisional ballots to be used for such purposes. The decision to issue provisional ballots is unnecessarily burdensome because those ballots will not be counted unless the voter later provides another form of identification proving that they are the person indicated on their identification. Advancement Project has asked Michigan to abandon this unwise and unlawful policy to avoid disenfranchising voters just because a voter does not look exactly like the picture on their identification. A change in hair color or style, or dramatic weight gain or weight loss, should not become a reason to disenfranchise a voter. Advancement Project will continue to demand that Land adhere to the law until voting laws are properly followed and voters' rights are protected. ED NOTE: See also MERA'S legislative plan and agenda for the fall session: http://www.michiganelectionreformalliance.org/ MERA will testify on HB 6198, a bill to prohibit vote caging. http://www.advancementproject.org/ Contact Email: mmacm@macmu.com 2008:Michigan Elections--Another Ohio?Published in: Michigan MessengerWritten by: Eartha Jane Melzer 8/5/08 Posted On: 8/9/2008 Click for printable PDF version Voting rights group: “We are sitting ducks for another Ohio here in Michigan” Some voters waited for hours to cast a ballot in the 2004 election in Ohio after too few voting machines were allocated in some precincts. The election system in Michigan has fundamental structural problems and is vulnerable to corruption from insiders, Jan BenDor, spokeswoman for the Michigan Election Reform Alliance, told Michigan Messenger. “This is not the way it is supposed to be,” said BenDor, a state accredited election administrator from Washtenaw county. MERA was founded in the wake of the 2004 recounts in Ohio by voting rights advocates who identified vulnerabilities in the Michigan system. There are reasons to expect problems with the November election, BenDor said. Every county has an elections commission made up of the treasurer, clerk and chief probate judge that is responsible for the security of elections, but a 2006 survey by MERA found that most of these commissions meet only if there is a recall. That means that Michigan‘s 1,500 local election officials receive little supervision or guidance, BenDor said. “I am sure most of them are extremely well intentioned, but they are busy,” she said, “.. and nobody is watching the store.” Other states do it better, BenDor said, adding, “Wisconsin, for example, has a nonpartisan governmental accountability commission that supervises and systematically monitors elections and promotes continuous quality improvement on election administration.” Election law enforcement is also a problem, according to MERA. In Michigan the secretary of state is responsible only for enforcing campaign finance law. All other areas of election law are enforced by local authorities. BenDor said that local police lack the training and resources to carry out that responsibility and that a survey of county prosecutors found “less than a handful” of election law cases have been prosecuted in the last ten years. The group has created a pilot project to monitor election administration practices in Washtenaw and Berrien counties during the primary election Tuesday. BenDor said that at least three dozen volunteers will evaluate issues, including the way that ballots arrive at the precinct, the chain of custody of ballots, and opportunities to put ballots into a tabulator without being observed — traditional ballot stuffing. “We are interested in the way that voters are handled when they have a problem and their name is not on the list.“ BenDor said. “Are the correct questions asked? Is the voter blown off or given a provisional ballot that may be inappropriate?” The information gathered will be used to refine an election watch program for the November election. http://www.michiganmessenger.com/1808/voting-rights-group-%e2%80%9cwe-are-sitting-ducks-for-another-ohio-here-in-michigan%e2%80%9d Contact Email: mmacm@macmu.com MICHIGAN'S POST CARD PURGE:One of Three States Accused of Illegally Purging Voter ListsPublished in: AlterNetWritten by: By Steven Rosenfeld, Posted On: 7/28/2008 Click for printable PDF version The states are swapping data files to find duplicate names, but civil rights attorneys say they are not following federal law to remove them. Election officials in a handful of states appear to be ignoring the federal law dictating the way registered voters may be purged from voter rolls, civil rights attorneys say. National voting rights groups have contacted officials in Kansas, Michigan and Louisiana in recent weeks because those states appear to be purging registered voters after election officials found duplicate names and birthdays of people on their voter lists and in out-of-state databases, such as driver's license records... Michigan's Secretive Approach In Michigan, the issues are more complex. Advancement Project's Heard said there has been an overall lack of "transparency" regarding several aspects of the state's voter purge process. In 2006, he said, Michigan election officials did a statewide mailing to all voters that did not mention the mailing would be used to verify voter registration information.... Jan BenDor, statewide coordinator for the Michigan Election Reform Alliance, a local voting rights group, said state officials cited an April 2007 letter from the Department of Justice pressuring the state to do more to clean up its voter roll for the statewide mailing and August 2006 purge. Ten states received those letters, which critics said was a political move because the claims of sloppy voter rolls was based on outdated data, notably U.S. Census population estimates. Since the 2006 purge, Michigan has used driver's license databases from other states to identify another 280,000 names as apparent duplicate voter registrations, Heard said.This month, staffers for Michigan Secretary of State Land, a Republican, canceled a meeting with Heard and Michigan activists to discuss purge issues. "We have been trying to get a meeting with election officials to talk about the issues and get their explanation," Heard said. "It's hard to say what happened with the 280,000 supposed out-of-state movers, since we can't get the info from the state." Land's spokeswoman, Chesney, did not respond to requests to comment. However, newspapers in Michigan have quoted Chesney as saying the meeting was canceled when an information session appeared to be a precursor to litigation. Heard said Advancement Project has not ruled out filing a lawsuit. "We have to evaluate all of our options," he said. "We are hoping the secretary of state's staff will sit down and talk about it." The purge issue is only going to rise in profile in the coming weeks. Several voting rights groups are studying the process in a number of swing states and hope to issue reports later this summer. Among the issues being studied is the accuracy of the database matches used to purge voters. When California first implemented a data-matching program in 2006, some counties had error rates as high as 40 percent, meaning a registered voter who appeared to have moved would have been incorrectly purged without further efforts to confirm their residency and voter registration status. Contact Email: mmacm@macmu.com VOTING GROUPS CAUTION MICHIGAN ELECTION OFFICIALSPublished in: JOINT PRESS RELEASE-ELECTION INTEGRITY NON-PROFITSPosted On: 7/28/2008 Click for printable PDF version (DETROIT, July 24, 2008)� Michigan Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land will host her fellow secretaries of state at the National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) conference in Grand Rapids, Michigan to discuss wide-ranging issues related to election reform and the 2008 election cycle. At the same time, advocates from the Michigan Election Reform Alliance (MERA), the Michigan State Conference of the NAACP, and the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) are expressing concerns with the possibility of massive voter disenfranchisement in Michigan during the 2008 election season, resulting from a series of unlawful purge programs undertaken or sanctioned by state election officials. The local groups, working with Advancement Project, a national civil rights group, have uncovered potential election problems that could impact hundreds of thousands of potential voters across the state. "We have acted in good faith with Secretary Land and [State Bureau of Elections Director] Chris Thomas from the very beginning. We have consistently and formally communicated our concerns about purge programs conducted by the Department of State, but have yet to make any progress with them in trying to resolve these issues before November," said Jan BenDor, a MERA statewide coordinator and a Michigan accredited election administrator. "Secretary Land and Mr. Thomas are public officials, and they have an obligation to meet with the public to address legitimate concerns regarding elections in this state. Their continued refusal to do so is quite troubling, in our opinion." Yvonne White, president of the Michigan State Conference of the NAACP, considers a sit-down meeting with state election officials to be instrumental in avoiding many foreseeable problems that voters may face on Election Day. However, White is concerned with the Bureau's recent refusal to meet. "Our goal is to prevent problems from occurring before the election, not after, and to do that, we need to have honest and open dialogue with our election officials," said White. ACORN's Michigan political director, Sheila Smith, is concerned about the impact of Michigan's purge programs on communities traditionally underrepresented in the electoral process. "Because the State will potentially be taking hundreds of thousands of eligible voters off of the rolls, there is a huge concern in the minority and low-income communities in which we work, because these communities are usually the ones most negatively impacted by statewide purges. Smith echoed the other groups� concerns about the need for transparency and open dialogue with state election officials: �All we are asking is for Mr. Thomas and the other state election officials to do their jobs. We are approaching them with open arms to try to address, and ultimately resolve, some of the major concerns before they cause irreparable harm to the citizens of Michigan on Election Day. Voter registration and voter turnout in Michigan, like in many other states across the country, is likely to be unprecedented, so we need to ensure that everyone who is eligible to vote is allowed to do so." Edward Hailes, Jr., senior attorney at Advancement Project, a national civil rights group that focuses on increasing democratic participation in low-income and minority communities, reinforced the concerns of local voter advocates. �Community leaders are understandably troubled by the resistance of Michigan's election officials, who are paid by taxpayer dollars, to have an open dialogue about the voting rights of its citizens. This lack of transparency makes a mockery of our democracy," said Hailes. http://www.michiganelectionreformalliance.org/index.html Contact Email: mmacm@macmu.com ACLU: COMPLAINT AGAINST SOS LAND, CASE EXCERPTSWritten by: ACLUPosted On: 10/28/2008 Click for printable PDF version Excerpts from the US Student Foundation and ACLU/Advancement Project case for an injunction to stop Secretary of State Land and Director of Elections Thomas from purging voters from the rolls in violation of federal voters rights law. Judge Stephen J. Murphy of the U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Michigan ruled that one of Michigan's voter removal programs violates the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA). Judge Murphy ordered that state to "immediately discontinue their practice of cancelling or rejecting a voter's registration based upon the return of the voter's original voter identification card as undeliverable." Links to the full text of the complaint and associated filings are given on the ACLU Voting Rights web page www.aclu.org/votingrights/gen/36838res20080917.html UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES STUDENT ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION, as an organization and representative of its members, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FUND OF MICHIGAN, as an organization and representative of its members, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF MICHIGAN, as an organization and representative of its members, Plaintiffs, v. TERRI LYNN LAND, Michigan Secretary of State, and CHRISTOPHER M. THOMAS, Michigan Director of Elections, FRANCES MCMULLAN, City Clerk for the City of Ypsilanti, Michigan, in their official capacities, Defendants. COMPLAINT Plaintiffs United States Student Association Foundation, American Civil Liberties Union Fund of Michigan and American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan (together, “Plaintiffs”), through their undersigned attorneys, for their Complaint against Defendants Terri Lynn Land, Michigan Secretary of State, Christopher M. Thomas, Michigan Director of Elections, and Frances McMullan, City Clerk for the City of Ypsilanti, Michigan, in their official capacities, state as follows: SUMMARY OF ACTION 1. This is an action seeking an injunctive order prohibiting the Michigan Secretary of State, Michigan Director of Elections and the City Clerk for the City of Ypsilanti, Michigan from engaging in actions which violate both federal and state laws protecting the rights of Michigan residents to vote. Through two separate policies and practices employed by the Michigan Department of State, thousands of voters have been, and will continue to be improperly disfranchised in Michigan. In violation of State and Federal law, Defendants are immediately cancelling voters’ registrations and removing their names from the eligible voting lists. Additionally, contrary to federal law, Defendants are rejecting voter’s registrations upon notice that original voter identification cards have been returned as undeliverable. Intervention by this Court is necessary to preserve for Michigan residents their fundamental right as citizens of Michigan and the United States to vote in the November election. Absent the requested injunctive relief, qualified Michigan voters will be disfranchised and prevented from voting in the November 4, 2008 election. PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE 2. Plaintiff United States Student Association Foundation (“USSA”) is a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of the District of Columbia. It was founded in 1947 and is the country’s oldest and largest national student-led organization. USSA develops current and future leaders and amplifies the student voice at the local, state, and national levels through grassroots mobilization efforts, and is dedicated to training, organizing, and developing a base of student leaders who are utilizing those skills to engage in expanding access to higher education and advancing the broader movement for social justice. A cornerstone of USSA’s activities is “helping students make their voice heard at the ballot box,” including through non-partisan voter registration drives. In that regard, USSA’s national electoral project focuses on building strong peer-to-peer student electoral coalitions and maximizing voter turnout among college populations. USSA employs a statewide field organizer in Michigan whose duties include organizing voter registration and get-out-the-vote (“GOTV”) activities at Michigan colleges and universities. 3. Plaintiffs ACLU Fund of Michigan (“ACLU Fund”) and ACLU of Michigan (“ACLU of Michigan”) are nonprofit organizations that engage in public education and lobbying about civil rights and civil liberties in the state of Michigan. The ACLU of Michigan has approximately 15,000 members with approximately 6,000 members located within the Eastern District of Michigan, most of whom are registered voters. Members of the ACLU of Michigan support its mission which is to protect and defend civil liberties. As such, members are civic activists with a strong interest in voting, efficient and fair elections, and equal access to the ballot. The ACLU Fund is extensively involved in a variety of voter empowerment initiatives throughout Michigan, including voter education, collection and analysis of voting irregularities, advocacy for positive election reform, and – when necessary – litigation to ensure the protection of voters’ rights under the law. The ACLU of Michigan is likewise dedicated to equal protection of the laws, including issues of racial justice and equality. The ACLU Fund and the ACLU of Michigan are both headquartered at 2966 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, MI 48201. 4. Defendant Terri Lynn Land (“Land”) is sued in her official capacity as Secretary of State of the State of Michigan. Her official residence is at Treasury Building, 1st Floor, 430 West Allegan, Lansing, MI 48918. In her capacity as Secretary of State, Defendant Land is the chief election officer of the state and has supervisory control over local election officials. Mich. Comp. Laws § 168.21. She is responsible for administering all statewide elections; for issuing instructions and promulgating rules for the conduct of elections; for publishing manuals of instructions on election administration for use at polling places; for prescribing uniform forms, notices, and supplies for use in the conduct of elections and regulations; and for training and instructing township, city, and village clerks with respect to election administration, among other things. Id. § 168.31. She is also responsible for coordinating the requirements of Michigan election law and federal law, including the Help America Vote Act of 2002 and National Voter Registration Act of 1993. Id. § 168.509n. In addition, she is charged with establishing and maintaining a statewide qualified voter file, as well as a computer system that allows each county, city, township, or village access to that file. Id. § 169.509r(1). 5. Defendant Christopher M. Thomas (“Thomas”) is sued in his official capacity as Director of Elections in the State of Michigan. His official residence is at Treasury Building, 1st Floor, 430 West Allegan, Lansing, MI 48918. Defendant Thomas is vested with the powers of the Secretary of State with respect to elections and is responsible for the supervision and administration of the election laws, under the supervision of the Secretary of State. Id. § 168.31. 6. Defendant Frances McMullan (“McMullan”) is sued in her official capacity as the City Clerk for the City of Ypsilanti, Michigan. Her official residence is at City Hall – First Floor, One South Huron Street, Ypsilanti, MI 48197. In her capacity as City Clerk, Defendant McMullan is responsible for receiving and processing voter registration applications for residents of the City of Ypsilanti; preparing and transmitting the required disposition notices related to such applications; and keeping all original records relating to each registered elector in the City of Ypsilanti. MCL §§ 168.497, 168.499, 168.500b, 168.500c. Specifically, Defendant McMullan is also the official charged by Michigan law with the responsibility of removing newly registered Ypsilanti voters from the rolls whenever their original voter identification cards are returned by the post office as undeliverable. MCL §§ 168.499(3), 168.500c. 7. The claims set forth in this Complaint are brought against both Land, Thomas and McMullan (collectively referred to as “Defendants”) in their official capacities. 8. This Court has jurisdiction of this controversy pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and § 1343(3) and (4). Supplemental jurisdiction over Count III is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1367. 9. This Court is the proper venue for adjudication of this dispute pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) and (2). … 32. Pursuant to the NVRA, a voter may not be removed from the voters list unless (1) the voter has requested removal; (2) state law requires removal by reason of criminal conviction or mental capacity; (3) the voter has confirmed in writing that he has moved outside the jurisdiction maintaining the specific voter list, or (4) the voter both (a) has failed to respond to a cancellation notice issued pursuant to the NVRA and (b) has not voted or appeared to vote in the two federal general elections following the date of notice. Michigan’s Differing Procedure Upon Return of Undeliverable Voter Identification Cards 33. Section 8(a)(1) of the NVRA imposes an obligation upon states to register qualified voters immediately upon receipt of their properly completed voter registration forms. 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(a)(1). 34. Section 8(a)(2), in turn, obligates states to send voters a disposition notice concerning their registration. 42 U.S.C. § 19733gg-6(a)(2). 35. Section 8(a)(3) prohibits states from removing voters from the rolls, except for reasons specified in the statute. … 36. Michigan’s Election Law requires city and township clerks to issue a voter identification card to any applicant that the clerk determines to be qualified to vote, based on the applicant’s completed voter registration application. MCL §§ 168.499(3), 168.500c. 37. After the voter’s identification card is generated, it is forwarded to the voter by first-class mail. MCL 5168.499(3). 38. However, the Michigan statute also provides that if the elector’s original voter identification card is returned as undeliverable, “the clerk shall reject the registration and send the individual a notice of rejection,” MCL § 168.499(3); that the returned original ID card is to be attached to the voter’s completed registration application, MCL § 168.500c; and that “the person shall be deemed not registered,” MCL § 168.500c (the “Cancellation Procedure”). 39. Thus, under this statutory provision, the voter who has completed an application, whose name has been added to the QVF, and who has been told by the Secretary of State: “Yes, You Are Registered!” is deemed not registered and removed from the voting rolls. … 57. As discussed below, these voters are being improperly and illegally disfranchised through the Defendants’ practice of immediately cancelling their voter registrations (the “Immediate Purging Practice”). 58. According to the Departments’ estimates, it cancels the registration of over 280,000 voters per year through this procedure. The Defendants’ Position and Stated Intent to Maintain the Present Procedure 59. The next general election will be held on November 4, 2008, and presents the opportunity for Plaintiffs’ members to select individuals for national, state and local offices. 60. By correspondence dated July 8, 2008, Plaintiffs’ co-counsel notified the Defendants that the Cancellation and Purging Procedures violate federal law, and urged the Defendants to discontinue such practices and to take remedial action to re-enfranchise affected voters. 61. Thomas, on behalf of the Defendants, responded by letter dated August 29, 2008. 62. As to the Immediate Purging Practice, Defendants affirmed that voter registrations are indeed cancelled in this manner, and that the onus lies with the voter to “correct the record,” stating that the change of address for purposes of a driver license constitutes a change of address for voter registration under federal law. 63. As to the Cancellation Procedure for newly-registered voters, the Defendants maintained that the individuals whose registrations are cancelled upon return of the original voter ID cards had “never become registered voters,” and, thus, could not have had their registrations cancelled. 64. Defendants neither agreed to alter their practices nor to reactivate the registrations of the affected voters. 65. Absent the requested injunctive relief, illegally disfranchised voters will be turned away when seeking to exercise their fundamental right to vote on November 4, 2008. www.aclu.org/votingrights/gen/36838res20080917.html Contact Email: mmacm@macmu.com MICH APPEALS COURT REDUCES SENIOR VOTING ACCESSCourt Rules Against Clerks Mailing AV Applications to SeniorsPublished in: Personal mailingWritten by: Jocelyn Friedrichs Benson Posted On: 7/1/2008 Click for printable PDF version Democracy Wounded June 27 2008 Jocelyn Friedrichs Benson Assistant Professor of Law, Wayne State University Law School A few years ago, I served as a law clerk to Federal Circuit Judge Damon J. Keith, who famously wrote that “Democracies die behind closed doors.” Democracies also die, I believe, when citizens’ fundamental right to vote is limited or disregarded. They die when Americans seeking to cast a ballot are turned away or deterred. And they die, as we have seen in Zimbabwe , when governments fail to ensure that avenues of competition and access are free and unfettered by threats and acts of intimidation. Taking this analogy a bit further, this “death” does not always manifest through one fatal blow. It comes through a series of wounds and injuries, often times seemingly minor or insignificant, but that collectively threaten the constitutional right of all voters to participate in the electoral process. On Friday morning, the Michigan Court of Appeals struck such a blow to the health of our democracy. In a per curiam opinion, three Judges concluded that Macomb County Clerk Carmella Sabaugh was not permitted to mail thousands of absentee ballot applications to citizens over the age of 60, who under state law are permitted to vote absentee without having to provide an excuse. (Voters under the age of 60 in Michigan who wish to vote with an absentee ballot are generally only permitted to do so if they state that they are physically unable to get to their polling place on Election Day). So in other words, though these senior citizens are automatically able to request an absentee ballot, their county clerk – who produces the ballots – is not permitted to simply send these voters a form that enables them to request such a ballot. In fact, the clerk is not permitted to do this even when her county government – in this case the Macomb County Board of Commissioners – expressly authorizes her to do so. According to yesterday’s decision, the county commission’s authority to “pass ordinances that relate to county affairs” does not include ordinances that address elections – even if county offices are on the ballot. But what is perhaps the most striking aspect of the court’s opinion is its conclusion that county clerks duties – which include preparing and distributing ballots to voting precincts and distributing election materials - do not “relate to increasing voter turnout or making the election process less onerous for voters.” This distressing conclusion is more than a confused interpretation of state law. It is also a conclusion that appears forgetful of the fundamental right to vote that the United States Supreme Court found to be implicit in the rights guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. The Michigan Court of Appeals seems to omit consideration of this basic tenet of our democracy in declaring that local election administrators have no authority to lessen a burden on the right to vote -- even where it involves such a simple act as mailing an application for absentee ballots to a community that under state law is expressly permitted to cast such ballots. In span of years that has seen the enactment of new identification requirements for voters and a botched presidential primary where one party’s eventual nominee was not even on the ballot, yesterday’s decision by the Michigan Court of Appeals struck yet another wound to the health of our democracy. Michigan voters deserve better. ******************* Jocelyn Friedrichs Benson Assistant Professor of Law Wayne State University Law School 471 W. Palmer St . Detroit MI 48202 Phone: (313) 577-3971 Fax: (313) 577-2620 jbenson@wayne.edu View my research at: http://ssrn.com/authorI2903 Contact Email: mmacm@macmu.com
Election News Related LinksAAUW Voting Records - Congressional voting records 110th congress, first session 2007 jan-dec Advancement Project - A nationally organized policy, communications and legal action group committed to racial justice Ann Arbor Voting Districts - Map of voting districts in Ann Arbor Black Box Voting - primary source for investigation of electronic voting Brad Blog - Bradblog closely follows elections and e-voting manipulations in particular Congress.org - Provides complete list of candidates and election dates statewide or according to the voters home district Conyers Blog - Rep.John Conyers, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee and election reform hero, comments on significant events Election Issues Websites - A directory of websites concerned with election issues -vote fraud by electronic or other means-as well as voter education and "where to" look in government agencies How can Americans force the majority party to enfo - "Have you egistered to vote?" I asked a friend of mine. "No, my vote doesn't count anyway." Unfortunately, this is true. Read the article by our own Valerie Constance... Huron Valley Greens - Ann Arbor area Greens home page Local Elections - Lists candidates on the ballot in all local districts Michigan Courts - Provides links to Michigan judicial districts and more Michigan Democratic Party - State Democratic Party home page with links MICHIGAN ELECTION REFORM ALLIANCE - Coordinated state wide network formed to create integrity in Michigan elections; affiliated with Vote Trust USA Michigan Greens - State Greens home page with links Michigan Legislature - Comprehensive website for tracking legislation, finding senators and representatives, district maps, etc Michigan Liberal - Covers Michigan politics;reports on 2006 candidate races for state offices Michigan Representative Districts - Lists all Michigan representative districts, and provides district maps.Search enabled Michigan Republican Party - State GOP home page with links MIRS - Michigan's oldest daily capitol news service: covers political action at the executive and legislative levels Open Secrets-Michigan - Michigan-and nation wide campaign finance and related news Pam Byrnes - Rep Pam Byrnes, 52 district candidate, campaign website Poll Workers for Democracy - Organizes, recruits, helps to traing poll workers in all states, SE Michigan included Printable Maps - Clickable maps of US Congressional Districts--handy for locating US Representatives' habitat Rebekah Warren - Rebekah Warren is running for Michigan House of Representatives-District 53.She is a member of WPA and endorsed by WPA Secretary of State - Primary Elections 2006 information Sen Liz Brater - offical website includes feedback form The Bankrollers Lobbysts Payments - Public Citizen's Congress Watch Report on Lobbyists Payments -includes 2006 election cycle Verified Voting Foundation - Advocates verifiable paper ballots; collects and data bases election incident reports; helps organize election reform at state levels Vote Trust USA - A national network of state-based organizations working for secure, accurate and transparent elections Washstenaw County GOP - Washtenaw County GOP home page Washtenaw Democrats - Washtenaw Democratic party home page Cost of the War in Iraq
(JavaScript Error)
|
General Links: About WPA | Contact WPA | Site Map | Endorsements | Links | Announcements
Member Links: Announcements | Member Directory | Manage Account | Info Exchange
P.O. Box 3182
Ann Arbor, MI 48106-3182
Site developed and maintained by City Beautiful Design