Legislative Updates
Arizona: House Bill 2876, sponsored by Buckeye Republican Rep. Michael Carbone, would basically ban the state’s no-excuse early voting system, with exceptions only for the elderly, disabled and for people who must be out of their precinct on Election Day. The bill, dubbed the “Free, Fair and Transparent Elections Act,” would also ban voting centers, a polling place model that Maricopa and Pima counties both use in which there are fewer voting locations, but anyone within the county can vote at any of them. Yavapai County, one of the most Republican counties in Arizona, was the first to use voting centers. The act would force a return to a precinct model in which there are more voting locations, but each voter would only have the opportunity to cast their vote at their designated precinct location. Those who try to vote at an incorrect polling location would not have their ballot counted. The proposal would also cut down the time for signature curing on early ballots to two days instead of five, and allow 12 days to canvass the votes following the election instead of 20. The bill passed out of the committee by a vote of 5-4 along party lines, with Republicans voting in favor. It heads next to the full House of Representatives for consideration.
Senate Republicans want tighter specifications on how electronic ballot tabulators are tested prior to elections, but the proposed legislation itself falls short on specifics. The proposal would require public testing of all electronic ballot tabulators no more than 25 days prior to the start of early voting, with a 48-hour notice to the public before the testing begins. The Secretary of State would be required to give all candidates on the ballot and their political parties notice of the testing as well, to give them the option to observe. Following the testing, the machines would be sealed until the start of early voting, and anyone who breaks the seal and tampers with the machine or reprograms it, and does not perform another test, would be guilty of a felony. Sen. Wendy Rogers, the chair of the Senate Elections Committee, said that Senate Bill 1288 legislation would “ameliorate some concerns of voters” and provide consequences for anyone who tampers with the tabulators.
Idaho: Idahoans could receive a state-issued voter guide for primary and general elections under a new bill headed to the Idaho Senate. Senate Bill 1273, brought by Idaho Secretary of State Phil McGrane, would require the Idaho secretary of state to prepare and distribute voter guides before primary and general elections. The bill would expand upon and replace a voters pamphlet already mailed to Idahoans. Many Western states, where many new Idaho residents are often moving from, have state-issued voter guides, McGrane said. An Idaho guide, he said, would provide crucial information to voters in need. Voters headed to the polls often know their vote for president, McGrane said. But not necessarily for races further down the ballot, he said. “A common thing I hear from voters is they’ll request an absentee ballot not because they want to vote absentee, but they just want to get the ballot in advance so they can go do their research,” McGrane said. The Idaho Senate State Affairs Committee voted unanimously Friday to advance the bill to the full Senate. To become law, the bill would also need to clear the full Idaho House and be reviewed by Gov. Brad Little. A similar bill McGrane sought last year passed the Idaho Senate, but did not advance in the House. Under the bill, Idaho’s new voter guide would have “uniform information about issues, measures, and candidates to be voted on.” Candidates could also submit a photo, a statement and campaign contact information.
One year after modifying voter registration requirements, the Idaho Legislature is taking steps to revise its requirements for Idahoans to obtain no-fee identification cards. In a 62-7 vote, the House of Representatives passed House Bill 532, which would remove the six month waiting period for individuals to qualify for a no-fee identification card through the Idaho Department of Transportation. The bill addresses issues that arose from two laws last year. The bill sponsor, Rep. Brandon Mitchell, R-Moscow, said the legislation would fix those situations that sponsors did not initially consider when they first passed the bill. “Let’s say we’ve got grandma moving in from Montana, and grandma had a driver’s license in Montana but cannot drive anymore, so she’s moving in with family,” he said during the floor debate. “Well because she had a Montana driver’s license within the last six months, she does not qualify for the free ID. What this does is simply remove that six months so that she will qualify for the free ID.” The bill is now headed to the Idaho Senate for consideration.
Kansas: Under a bill studied by the Senate Federal and State Affairs Committee, the Legislature would have to pass and a governor sign a bill appropriating HAVA funding for election-related activities. Sen. Mike Thompson, a Shawnee Republican and the Senate committee chairman, introduced Senate Bill 367. He said he relied on allegations raised by Opportunity Solutions Project, a conservative Florida think tank. The organization has previously sought passage in Kansas of laws to restrict voting and curtail welfare benefits. The current Senate bill would forbid Kansas election officers from accepting millions of dollars in financial assistance from the federal government for elections without consent of the Legislature and a governor. The secretary of state’s office raised questions about the legislation and argued there was no clear purpose for the bill. Loud Light Civic Action, which has sought to improve Kansas’ compliance with federal voting laws, opposed the bill based on a belief it was inspired by misguided conspiracy theorists. Clay Barker, general counsel to the secretary of state, said Schwab was neutral on the bill. He said purpose of the legislation wasn’t apparent despite testimony by Opportunity Solutions Project.He said the bill targeted election officials in Kansas, but not governors or county commissioners with budgetary roles in management of elections. He said the secretary of state’s office routinely provided House and Senate committees with information about deployment of federal HAVA funding.
To alleviate staffing gaps at polling stations, the House Elections Committee met on Feb. 13 to discuss solutions to broaden the pool of eligible workers to potentially allow participation by active military members, their spouses or dependents and full-time college students who are not registered to vote in a county. House Bill 2616, which was requested for introduction by Kansas Republican National Committeewoman Kim Borchers, prohibits the disqualification of individuals as poll workers due to residency, registered voter status or age. “This is not a silver bullet to make sure that we have all of our polling locations filled,” Borchers told the committee. “But I do believe this is a tool in the toolbox of our hardworking election commissioners and their clerks.” Under the proposed bill, someone does not have to be eligible to vote in Kansas to work as a poll worker. In written neutral testimony, Clay Barker with the Secretary of State’s Office agreed that this bill would help expand the pool of available poll workers. However, Barker said the bill lacks clarity regarding the requirements for U.S. citizenship for military personnel, dependents and students, as well as the process for determining political affiliation to ensure compliance with mandatory staffing partisan balance.
Maryland: Maryland lawmakers are considering legislation to enable authorities to prosecute people who threaten to harm election officials or their immediate family members, as threats are on the rise across the country. The Protecting Election Officials Act of 2024, which has the support of Gov. Wes Moore, would make threatening an election official a misdemeanor punishable by up to three years in prison or a fine of up to $2,500. The measure would prohibit someone from knowingly and willfully making a threat to harm an election official or an immediate family member of an election official, because of the election official’s role in administering the election process. “This has been a phenomenon which has occurred across the country,” said Eric Luedtke, Moore’s chief legislative officer, at a bill hearing Wednesday. “It’s a phenomenon that has targeted election workers, regardless of political affiliation, race, gender, what roles their filling.” Ruie Marie LaVoie, who is vice president of the Maryland Association of Elections Officials and now serves as director of the Baltimore County Board of Elections, testified about her experience being threatened during the 2022 election. She testified before the Senate Education, Energy, and the Environment Committee that the measure would help ensure the safety and security “of those at the forefront of preserving our democratic processes.”
New Hampshire: The affidavit process that permits New Hampshire voters to cast ballots without identification on Election Day would be eliminated under a bill sponsored by Republican Rep. Bob Lynn of Windham. Under this bill, voters would need to be able to show proof at the polls of not simply their identity and domicile status — which can be done with a driver’s license — but also also their citizenship, which would require a birth certificate, naturalization papers, or a passport. Several local election officials said voters don’t always carry such official documents to the polls. “If you want to vote, you provide the documentation,” Lynn, a former chief justice of the New Hampshire Supreme Court, told the House Election Law Committee Tuesday. “You can register on the day of the elections, but if you don’t provide the documentation you don’t vote. Simple as that.” But critics — including several town election officials, the League of Women Voters and other voting rights groups — said the bill, which is identical to a proposal Lynn sponsored last year that failed in the House, wasn’t so simple and would put unnecessary hurdles in front of legitimate voters. “A small minority do not have all the paperwork. Having the affidavits makes it work,” said Hancock Supervisor of the Checklist Katherine Anderson.
Oklahoma: A bill to ban ranked choice voting statewide cleared a House committee last week, prompting pushback from one lawmaker who argues the system would benefit voters and candidates alike. House Bill 3156 by Eric Roberts, R-Oklahoma City, would prohibit ranked-choice voting in statewide and municipal elections. A handful of other states and dozens of municipalities utilize the method, where voters rank candidates by preference, and results are narrowed until one candidate receives a majority of votes. While no municipality in Oklahoma has authorized ranked choice voting, and the state’s current fleet of voting machines cannot accommodate the voting method, Roberts told members of the House Elections and Ethics Committee the bill is necessary to protect the elderly and others from a more complex voting system. He said possible errors could “hide the true intent of the voting public.”
Pennsylvania: Rep. Tim Brennan, D-Bucks, is introducing legislation to prevent firearms at polling places. C-sponsored with Rep. Mary Jo Daley, D-Montgomery, the bill would allow gun owners to keep their weapon stored in their car, but would make it a misdemeanor offense to bring it inside a polling place. Pennsylvania already forbids guns in schools and courthouses. Many polling places are at such locations, and so firearms are already banned at those sites. Currently if a polling place is at a private business, then firearm possession is the decision of the building’s owners. The ban would not apply to law enforcement and active military personnel. The bill would take effect after 60 days. This means if passed even immediately after the House returns on March 18, it would not be in effect for the April 23 primary.
South Dakota: In a 9-3 vote today, the House State Affairs Committee approved a bill aimed at expanding and safeguarding Native American voting rights. Senate Bill 119, which would permit Native American voters to register using their Tribal identification, placing it on par with a state-issued driver’s license. This change is intended to help Native Americans surmount the structural and socioeconomic barriers that have historically limited their participation in elections. “If Native Americans can engage fully in the political system — free from the barriers that currently obstruct them — they can participate in America in a way that is fair and just,” said Samantha Chapman, ACLU of South Dakota advocacy manager. “Passing this bill and signing it into law would remove a significant obstacle to voting for many Native Americans in South Dakota.”
Tarrant County, Texas: Tarrant County will not offer free rides to the polls in this year’s Texas primary elections. A request to fund the program in partnership with Trinity Metro was rejected by commissioners during the Tarrant County Commissioners Court meeting on Wednesday. The vote was 3-2 along party lines, with the two Democrats on the court voting to fund the program. County Judge Tim O’Hare spoke out against the program, which was offered during elections from 2019 through 2023. Although the program was not approved countywide in 2023, it was approved for Fort Worth voters. “I don’t believe it’s the county government’s responsibility to try to get more people out to the polls,” he said. “It’s the responsibility of candidates, it’s the responsibility of political parties, it’s the responsibility of political groups.” The program would have given free rides for Tarrant County residents to voting locations for the March 5 primary election, early voting for the May 28 runoff election and on runoff election day.
Virginia: After passing the House of Delegates 99-0, legislation that would strip future Virginia governors of their power to handpick the state’s elections commissioner ran into trouble Tuesday in a Senate committee. The bill, which has drawn bipartisan support in the House despite being sponsored by a Republican, is the latest of several attempts to reduce the role of partisan politics in the state’s election bureaucracy. Similar efforts have failed late in previous sessions, and the new complications in the Senate highlight the complexity of trying to get partisanship out of an election system that’s inherently political. Instead of the next governor being able to hire someone to lead the Virginia Department of Elections, the bill under consideration by the Democratic-controlled General Assembly would give that ability to the five-person State Board of Elections. By law, the governor’s party controls that board, but the pending legislation would require a supermajority vote (four of five members) in order to hire and fire elections commissioners. At a committee hearing, Sen. Schuyler VanValkenburg, D-Henrico, asked whether it’s realistic to expect Democrats and Republicans to agree on who should run the elections department given the threats and intimidation directed at election officials from the right. Proponents of the bill have said the elections board, which includes ex-legislators from both parties, has worked in a mostly bipartisan manner and has a real chance of making a “consensus pick” on the next commissioner. “I don’t think it’s far-fetched to think that you could have a 5-0 vote,” said Del. Israel O’Quinn, R-Bristol, the bill’s sponsor.
West Virginia: The Senate Government Organization Committee took a swipe at ranked-choice voting, advancing a bill to prohibit the practice in local government elections. SB 593 is the bill, and says local governments may not use ranked-choice voting for any local, state or federal election. It defines the method at length: “Tabulation proceeds in rounds such that in each round either a candidate or candidates are elected, or the last-place candidate is defeated; votes are transferred from elected or defeated candidates to the voters’ next ranked candidate or candidates in order of preference; and tabulation ends when a candidate receives the majority of votes cast or the number of candidates elected equals the number of offices to be filled.” The committee approved the bill in a voice vote without debate and it goes next to Judiciary.
Senate Bill 622, changes the time period of voting inactivity for removal from voter registration. Currently, a voter can go four years without voting or updating voter information before being considered inactive. This bill moves it to two years. For example, if a voter didn’t vote in one presidential election, they could be ineligible to vote in the next presidential election. The bill is a use it or lose it voting law. If voters don’t vote for more than two years, they get flagged. However, if voters confirm their address or register for a change of address, they will stay registered to vote, and their inactive status will be dropped. Voters can vote in any local, state or federal election or ballot to stay an active voter. Lead sponsor of the bill Sen. Eric Tarr, R-Putnam, said the bill is to make sure voters are not registered to vote in two different precincts and to verify voter eligibility.
Wisconsin: Local clerks may still have to wait until Election Day to begin processing absentee ballots i, despite a bipartisan effort to allow for early canvassing. The state Assembly passed legislation in November that would allow election workers to begin processing absentee ballots the day before an election. But in an interview that aired Sunday, Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu, R-Oostburg, told WISN-TV that the bill is likely dead, saying he doubts the legislation will make it out of a Senate committee. “I think a couple members of the committee have problems with the bill,” LeMaheiu said. The Republican-authored bill would allow municipalities to begin canvassing absentee ballots the day before an election, and require it in communities that use a central location for counting absentee ballots, like Milwaukee. Election workers would not be allowed to tally the ballots during early canvassing. The change has been proposed by both Democrats and Republicans for years. Large cities often take longer to process the large quantity of absentee ballots they receive, sometimes leading to late-night swings in unofficial election results. That fueled former President Donald Trump’s false claims of vote “dumping” in 2020, when the final tally of votes in Democratic cities like Milwaukee weren’t known until the middle of the night.
Legal Updates
U.S. Supreme Court: The Supreme Court rejected appeals brought by Trump-allied lawyers who faced legal sanctions for baselessly alleging in court that the 2020 election in Michigan was fraudulently won by President Joe Biden. By rejecting the appeals, the court left in place a June 2023 ruling by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that partially upheld the sanctions. Prominent cheerleaders of former President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the election including Sidney Powell and Lin Wood were among the nine lawyers who initially faced sanctions for filing the lawsuit. Powell called the group “the Kraken.” The appeals court upheld sanctions against seven of them, including Powell and Wood. The lawyers were ordered to pay legal fees, undertake new legal training and were referred to their respective state bar associations for any disciplinary procedures.
Arizona: The Democratic National Committee is looking to jump into a pair of Arizona election lawsuits, another salvo in the sprawling legal battle over the country’s election procedures ahead of November. The DNC and Arizona Democratic Party, with assistance from the Biden campaign, filed motions to intervene in two lawsuits filed in state court from GOP and third party groups this month, according to filings first shared with POLITICO. The lawsuits target the state’s Election Procedure Manual — which is designed to guide Arizona election officials in conducting and certifying elections. Republicans have challenged the manual several times, with RNC chair Ronna McDaniel arguing earlier this month that the document is “designed to undermine election integrity.”
Georgia: Rudy Giuliani has appealed a $148 million verdict against him won by two former Fulton County election workers.In December a federal jury in Washington, D.C., awarded Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss the money because Giuliani falsely accused them of fraud in the 2020 election. Guliani denounced the verdict as an “absurdity” and predicted it would be “reversed so quickly it will make your head spin.” This week, he formally appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Following the original verdict, Giuliani filed for bankruptcy in New York, listing debts of as much as $500 million and assets of up to $10 million. On Tuesday the judge in that case gave Giuliani permission to appeal the defamation verdict. But the judge ruled that Giuliani cannot pay for the appeal himself, and anyone who pays for the appeal will not have a claim on his assets.
Kansas: A Kansas law that makes it a crime to impersonate an election official unconstitutionally interferes with voter outreach efforts, voting rights groups told the state Supreme Court on this week. Their argument was met with opposition from state officials, who say the law helps curb fraud. Attorneys for both sides sparred in a court hearing over the constitutionality of a key component of Republicans’ efforts to restrict voting rights in the wake of unfounded claims of voter fraud during the 2020 election. The hearing took place on the final day for Kansans to register to vote in the state’s 2024 presidential preference primary election, which is scheduled for March 19. Elizabeth Frost, an attorney arguing for the voting rights groups, asked the court to swiftly block the law or direct a lower court to do so. “Every single day that goes by that the plaintiffs are under this threat is a harm not just to them,” she said, “but to the public.” The law violates the First Amendment of voting rights groups, she said, and is overly vague and broad — making it liable to arbitrary enforcement by the courts and law enforcement. Voting rights groups say the law has caused them to cancel voter registration drives and other outreach activities because their volunteers are scared they could be prosecuted for helping people register to vote. Secretary of State Scott Schwab and Attorney General Kris Kobach are defending the law. Bradley Schlozman, an attorney arguing on their behalf, said the law was meant to crack down on what he described as “nefarious actors” gathering information from voters during the 2020 election and using it to commit identity theft.
Kentucky: An effort to reinstate the voting rights to some people in Kentucky with felony convictions will not be heard in the U.S. Supreme Court. The high court announced this week afternoon that it has denied a petition to review Aleman v. Beshear, receiving criticism from an attorney involved in the case. “Voting is the height of political expression,” said Jon Sherman, litigation director at Fair Elections Center and lead counsel for the plaintiffs in the case. “This decision will allow governors in Kentucky and other states around the country to continue to personally pick and choose whose voting rights are restored based on applicants’ political beliefs or party affiliations.”
Pennsylvania: The U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments this week on whether Pennsylvania’s requirement for voters to accurately date mail-in ballots passes muster under federal voting law. The question of whether ballots with a missing or incorrect date should be counted has been a factor in elections since Pennsylvania’s no-excuse absentee voting law took effect in 2020. And the outcome of the case now before the Third Circuit will determine how such ballots are handled in the 2024 presidential election in which Pennsylvania is considered a must-win state. Erie-based U.S. District Judge Susan Paradise Baxter ruled last year that election officials may no longer reject ballots that lack a date or have an incorrect date on the outside of the return envelope. Baxter found that throwing out ballots over the dating requirement violates a federal law against disenfranchising voters with requirements not material to their qualifications to vote. Lawyers for the ACLU, the NAACP, League of Women Voters, and other organizations and for Pennsylvania Secretary of State Al Schmidt argued that the lower court’s decision is correct.
Utah: Dustin Hansen, 31, of Nibley, was charged with one count of willful neglect of duty/corrupt conduct by a poll worker, which is a third-degree felony. Hansen — who was an elections coordinator with the Cache County Clerk/Auditor’s Office — was charged Feb. 16, according to court records. Charging documents say Hansen was responsible for sending a test of vote tabulating machines to the Utah Lieutenant Governor’s Office, which is the body that oversees all elections in the state. Hansen allegedly forged the date of the test, charging documents say. The lieutenant governor’s office suspected the document was forged, and Cache County prosecutors later found that Hansen allegedly, “had used PDF editing software on his work computer to alter the document.” In an emailed statement, interim Cache County Attorney Taylor Sorensen told The Salt Lake Tribune members of his office, “unanimously agreed that the conduct alleged met the elements of the charge under Utah law.” Prosecutors have proposed issuing a summons to Hansen to appear in Logan’s 1st District Court. Hansen does not have an initial appearance date set, and he does not have an attorney listed in court records.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker
No comments:
Post a Comment