Yesterday, the Kansas House of Representatives gave preliminary approval to a bill that would require Kansas voters to shower photo ID at the polls. The bill is expected to be voted on next Friday. If passed, the new legislation would come into effect by the 2010 election. The bill includes exemptions for voters 65 years old and over, those with disabilities, soldiers on active duty away from their district, and citizens living abroad.

The Wichita Eagle offers more details on the bill.




Election day registration in MA could boost turnout

A new report by Demos estimates that Election Day Registration (EDR) in Massachusetts would increase overall voter turnout by nearly 5% and would increase the youth vote by nearly 10%. EDR allows citizens to register and to vote on Election Day. The report was authored by R. Michael Alvarez of Cal Tech and Jonathan Nagler of NYU. In their report, Alvarez and Nagler, write "Moving to EDR would lower that hurdle for thousands of citizens in Massachusetts, and bring more participants into the democratic process."

Legislation has been introduced in Massachusetts that would facilitate EDR. Currently, Massachusetts citizens must register 20 days in advance of an election. According to Demos, 8 states currently have EDR.

Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) is proposing new legislation that would put an end to voter caging, a practice in which the voter rolls are questioned. It can lead to unwarranted purges or challenges of eligible citizens. The Caging Prohibition Act (S. 2305) would outlaw voter caging, and was first introduced in November 2007, and is pending before the Senate Rules and Administration Committee. Sheldon, testifying before the committee in February, said,

It is an unfortunate reality that, with so much at stake in the ballot box, organized efforts to suppress the vote go nearly as far back as the right to vote itself...Protecting the rights of eligible voters is essential to the health of our democracy.

In commentary posted on Wednesday, Rick L. Hasen -- a law professor at Loyola Law School-- argues that the Supreme Court's recent decision in Washington State Grange v. Washington State Republican Party may be setting the groundwork for future decisions that could limit voting rights. By rejecting facial challenges to election law, Hasen believes,the Supreme Court, will allow increasing restrictions on voting, and will likely uphold the Indiana voter ID requirement law in the Crawford v. Marion County Election Board case pending before the court. Hasen writes,

If the Court upholds the Indiana voter ID law on these grounds, we can expect a host of other partisan election laws to be put in place, and for those laws no longer to be subject to facial challenges. That means, in turn, that the laws will have to be in effect for a while before they are challenged, and that they will cause damage in the interim, at a minimum. With two thumbs on the scale on the side of the state, poor and minority voters will hardly have a chance.

Last week a new effort began which uses technology to promote a transparent and open government. ChangeCongress wants legislators to make four commitments, which they can do by filling out a form indicating which of the pledges they support. In the end, it provides a graphic that the candidates can then place on their election campaign web sites. Citizens can also fill out pledges to put on their own website. ChangeCongress is an innovative way to organize citizens, encourage them to be politically active, and in doing so demands accountability in political campaigns.

Founder Lawrence Lessig writes on HuffingtonPost.com; "Change-Congress.org will be a bi-partisan, web-based effort to leverage and amplify the important reform work being done by others. […] Change-Congress.org will develop in three stages. The first layer will give candidates and Members of Congress a simple way to signal their support for any mix of four fundamental planks of reform: (1) a promise not to accept PAC or lobbyist contributions, (2) a commitment to abolish "earmarks" permanently, (3) a commitment to support public financing of public elections, and (4) a commitment to compel transparency in the functioning of Congress. Once a candidate or Member selects the planks he or she supports, the site will give the candidate code to embed that pledge on the campaign website. Citizens too will be able to take a similar pledge, promising to support candidates who match their own vision of reform. When they do, they will be linked back to reform organizations that support each plank.

Video of the launch of ChangeCongress is available from the Sunlight Foundation.

A recent AlterNet story highlights an unfortunate case that has been going on since the 2004 presidential election, challenging the refusal of the Veterans Administration to help soldiers register to vote. In August 2007 the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, in Preminger v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs upheld a decision that permitted the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) to exclude voter registration by third-party groups in VA facilities; "we cannot say that it is unreasonable for the VA to regulate the activities taking place on its grounds and to exercise its discretion in determining when a 'demonstration' (defined to include 'partisan activities') would be disruptive." And recently in February, the case was denied rehearing.

It is pretty outrageous that the VA continues to block efforts to help U.S. soldiers register to vote at its facilities. Scott Rafferty, an attorney in the Preminger case was quoted in the AlterNet article saying, "This is politically motivated voter suppression."

Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and John Kerry (D-MA) sent a letter to VA Secretary James B. Peake urging that all veterans in VA facilities should be able to participate in voter registration activities. The senators' letter states; "Certainly we all agree it is an insult to those who have fought to spread democracy and freedom overseas to be denied the right to participate in their own democracy here at home."

Furthermore, we understand that the Court of Appeals seemed to indicate that the VA's role in assisting veterans was purely medical. However, the VA has a long and proud history of providing a myriad of services to veterans - helping them lead successful and productive lives. Providing them with the opportunity to become more actively involved in our democracy seems an appropriate role for the VA. The argument that providing access to voter registration at facilities would distract from the medical goals is as unfortunate as it is counterproductive.