In preparation for the 2016 presidential election, Democrats appear united around one candidate, while the Republican contest remains far from secured. Many on the left, who view Hillary Clinton’s stances as a tame brand of liberalism, have attempted to draft Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., to run. But the progressives do not need a charismatic leader. Instead, they need to invest in unleashing the disgruntled progressive majority.
Just in time for the end of the presidential election voter registration period, the United States Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) has issued the important report, “Increasing Compliance With Section 7 of the National Voter Registration Act,” on voter registration access.
New Mexico State Representatives, with the support of many organizations and coalitions and the New Mexico Inclusive Democracy Project, announced a constitutional amendment to increase voter access in New Mexico.
Motor Voter has proven effective in expanding voter registration in this country and bringing millions of eligible Americans into the democratic process. It is only to be feared by politicians who, like Trump and King, see their path to power only through a smaller, whiter electorate.
Since 2006, states across the country have implemented strict voter ID laws, which require photo identification at polling places. Extensive research has suggested that these laws are motivated by racism and partisanship.
What happened in 2016? In a recent Monkey Cagepiece, I discussed the research Demos is performing with political scientists Bernard Fraga, Brian Schaffner and Jesse Rhodes on how depressed turnout contributed to Trump’s electoral college victory. However, the piece doesn’t discuss what caused that decline in turnout and what it means for the future of the Democratic Party.
Illinois also becomes one of 4 states (Colorado, Connecticut and Vermont) to offer both AVR and Same-Day Registration (SDR). These reforms in tandem complement each other in the effort to best expand voter access and increase turnout.
Many states have rightly refused to provide private data from their voting rolls to the commission. However, the commission will still have access to highly inappropriate federal immigration data to “study” Trump’s theory that millions of noncitizens have voted.
On Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard our Ohio voter purge case, Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute. At issue in the case is Ohio’s Supplemental Process, an unjust practice of removing infrequent voters from its registration rolls.
Today, for the first time, a federal court told a state that its planned use of the controversial Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck System (“Crosscheck”) to purge registered voters likely violates federal law.
