A new study revealed that many states are routinely failing to offer low-income Americans an opportunity to register to vote as required by the federal National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), as the nation prepares for the 2008 election. The study shows that 12 years after the NVRA’s requirements went into effect, voter registrations from public agencies, which provide services to low-income Americans, have declined dramatically. The study was published this week by the non-partisan voting rights groups Demos and Project Vote.

The study, “Unequal Access: Neglecting the National Voter Registration Act, 1995-2007,” presents the case that state voter registration data at states across the nation–Virginia, Florida, Texas, Nevada and many others–public assistance agencies are neglecting to offer voter registration to all clients and applicants, as required by the law. Therefore, the rights of thousands of low-income citizens are violated daily, because of noncompliance with the NVRA.

“All Americans should have an opportunity to register and vote, but states are ignoring a federal law that requires them to offer voter registration to low-income citizens. In 2006, more than twice as many low-income Americans were unregistered as upper-income Americans. States need to follow the law. If they do, we can close the registration gap between rich and poor,” says “Unequal Access: Neglecting the National Voter Registration Act, 1995-2007″ co-author Douglas R. Hess. “Our democracy works best when everyone, not just some, are allowed to participate.”

This study’s findings underscore widespread state failures in enforcing the NVRA, including the following items:

*** Registrations from public assistance agencies have declined 79 percent between 1995, when the Act was first implemented, and in 2006; in other words, registrations declined from 2.6 million to just 540,000 by the 2005-2006 reporting period.

*** Field investigations and analysis of available data strongly suggest that low registration rates are a result of states’ noncompliance with the law.

*** The decline in registrations from public assistance agencies occurred despite the fact that millions of citizens from low-income households remain unregistered. In 2006, 13 million (40 percent) of voting-age citizens from households earning under $25,000 were unregistered.

*** The U.S. Department of Justice has failed in recent years to actively enforce the public assistance provisions of the NVRA. This is despite being provided with evidence of noncompliance by Project Vote, Demos, Congressional leaders and others.

The NVRA was enacted in 1993 with the goal of increasing the number of eligible citizens registered to vote. The law requires states to offer citizens an opportunity to register to vote when they apply for or renew their driver’s license (“motor voter”) and when citizens apply for public assistance benefits such as Food Stamps or Medicaid. The latter provision was designed to reduce disparities in the voting population based on race and income.

“When public assistance agencies offer voter registration as the law requires, their clients register to vote,” says the co-author of this study Scott Novakowski. “States like North Carolina and Iowa have recently improved their agency registration procedures, resulting in dramatic increases in the number of low-income citizens registering to vote. If all states were to fully comply with the law, thousands of eligible low-income voters could be drawn into the democratic process every day.”

In conjunction with the publication of this study, Project Vote and Demos has sent notices to Arizona and Florida for non-compliance with NVRA. Such notices are required before initiating litigation.

For more information about the National Voter Registration Act and to download a copy of “Unequal Access…,” visit either organization’s website: http://www.projectvote.org/ or http://www.demos.org/.

(Ed.: For the states of Arizona, Florida, Texas, and Nevada mentioned in this post, the political party affiliation of the governors in office during 2006 were Republican for three of the four states. Even though the above fact does not consider all of the states in which voter rights were denied and my conclusion can not be considered representative of all the states in the study, I wonder which political party might benefit from not registering low-income citizens?… Ok, there’s no doubt about it. Republican candidates would benefit. To continue along this line of reasoning, does this mean that a political party should, in essence, deny a voice to some of the country’s citizenry? Presuming that my conclusion about governor political party affiliations was correct, has the United States, which has shown as a beacon of democracy to the world, been a proper example for the way that a democracy conducts business? Especially, when it appears that our current President snagged the White House in 2000 and 2004 because of the political gamesmanship of Mr. Rove and NOT based upon his qualifications?

Hopefully, our image and ethics as a nation will fly again as high and as proudly as we fly our flags.)

Source for this post: Project Vote

Websites: http://www.demos.org/

http://www.projectvote.org/

No related posts.

Pakistan‘s February 18, 2008 parliamentary elections will have an international election observation mission organized by Democracy International, as they were awarded a grant by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). There will be a 35-person delegation, which will be led by former U.S. Congressman Jim Moody and will include experts in election processes and Pakistani politics, as well as leaders from the political, academic and foreign policy fields. This mission will be in addition to other international observers from the European Union, Japan, the United Kingdom, and Canada.

The grant is part of the USD $1.5 billion in aid that the U.S. Government is providing to Pakistan, through USAID, over five years to improve economic growth, education, health, governance, and reconstruction of earthquake-affected areas.

For more information about USAID and its programs in Pakistan, please visit their website: http://www.usaid.gov/

The American people, through the U.S. Agency for International Development, have provided economic and humanitarian assistance worldwide for nearly 50 years.

For more information, contact the U.S. Agency for International Development Public Information Office at (202) 712-4810.

About Democracy International:

Democracy International, based in Bethesda, MD., designs, evaluates, implements, and provides technical assistance for democracy and governance programs.

Source for this post: U.S. Agency for International Development

Website: http://www.usaid.gov/

No related posts.

As states clamber to move up the dates of their presidential primaries, politicians and political parties are scrambling to rethink their campaign strategies. Much of the news coverage of this issue has focused on the impact of those changes on particular candidates.

However, in a new issue brief from The Century Foundation, Democracy Fellow Tova Andrea Wang warns that more attention needs to be paid to the impact of a changed primary schedule on voters and on the democratic process. She argues that, while the news about frontloading the primaries may not be all bad, the voting rights and civil rights communities need to make sure that any changes to the primary system enhance the democratic process by serving the rights of the voters.

In “The Presidential Primary System’s Democracy Problems,” Wang examines the current primary system as well as two widely discussed alternative primary plans: a proposal from the National Association of Secretaries of State, which recommends regional primaries with the order of the regions voting rotating each cycle, and a plan promoted by the Center for Voting and Democracy, called the America Plan, which features a schedule consisting of ten intervals, during which randomly selected states may hold their primaries. This plan would require that smaller states hold primaries in the earlier rounds.

Wang assesses these three systems in terms of their effect on four fundamental democratic principles:
- adequate choice among candidates;
- diverse, fair representation in the electorate;
- maximizing voter participation and turnout; and
- ensuring voters have the information they need to cast educated votes.

She finds that all plans — including the current system — address some of these issues positively, but that none adequately promote all of these fundamental principles. In the brief, Wang shows how some of the plans might be adjusted to be more favorable to voters. She also offers other potential fixes that might ameliorate the negative effects of the current system. Those recommendations include:
- addressing problems in early voting;
- reforming the campaign finance system;
- delaying the start of all primaries; and
- involving Congress in setting primary schedules.

“The Presidential Primary System’s Democracy Problems” is the first in a series of issues briefs on the presidential primaries. You can download this and other related briefs, reports, and commentary from The Century Foundation’s Election Reform site, http://www.reformelections.org/, or from the home site, http://www.tcf.org/.

The Century Foundation conducts public policy research and analyses of economic, social, and foreign policy issues, including inequality, retirement security, election reform, media studies, homeland security, and international affairs. The foundation produces books, reports, and other publications, convenes task forces and working groups, and operates seven informational Web sites. With offices in New York City and Washington, D.C., The Century Foundation is nonprofit and nonpartisan and was founded in 1919 by Edward A. Filene.

No related posts.