I am working on very little sleep right now because we were trying to settle down our dog as we were barraged with fireworks all night until 2 a.m. There has been so much discussion on our neighborhood's Next Door app about fireworks lately. Some have asked their neighbors to follow the city ordinances because their dogs and family members with PTSD are terrified of fireworks.
Other neighbors have insisted that those neighbors who ask them to stop setting off their fireworks -- illegally -- should just "relax" because it's their one day to celebrate our nation's independence. The problem has been that their one day is normally "celebrated" in our neighborhood for two weeks. This has been the sixth sleepless night and we will have more until they use up all their fireworks. What will be their excuse for the next occasion to light up fireworks? Clearly, it's not to celebrate our nation's independence.
So why did I bring this up? Our city is a microcosm of how divided our nation is today. This incident is similar to many political arguments -- or actually any argument that is politicized (as in this case) -- being made where one or both sides aren't listening and attempting to find a common ground. The discourse has become so hostile that there is little hope for a solution. (In a future post, I'll describe how historically this fractured and negative politicking began.)
I believe that the American people, as a whole, do not want a government that is dysfunctional. Yet, many do not vote to protect their way of life or, worse, are hindered from voting to make a difference. What becomes important, now, is motivating people to vote, making sure the majority of the American people's vote has power and supporting the efforts to ensure fair voting practices.
Protecting Our Voters Rights -- First Attempt
Last year, the Freedom to Vote Act, based on a bill proposed by Senator Joe Manchin, was introduced to address a few of the state-level restrictions and inconsistencies related to ballot access and election protection. It was meant, also, to close loopholes that Trump's team sought to use in the 2020 election, specifically restricting interference with election workers and clarifying the electoral vote count certification. It would make Election Day a holiday; set minimum standards for mail voting, early voting, drop boxes and voter ID; address voter roll purges; and address partisan redistricting. Unfortunately, when it came across the Senate, there were not enough votes to pass it.
Since then, state-level legislation has pushed to restrict voting 1 at a near-record pace, driven by the still-active election denier movement. Overall, in 2022 and 2023, at least 322 restrictive bills were introduced in 45 states. Of these, 25 states have already enacted them.
Several state-level trends in voting legislation this year are disturbing. Some states are aiming to limit ways that voters can pass ballot measures (for example, disallowing citizen petitioning to bring about a ballot measure). Others continue to push criminalizing election-related activities such as the poll worker duty to shield voter information from poll watchers. In Florida, 20 people, all of whom had past criminal convictions, were charged with voter fraud for what appeared to be honest mistakes about their voter eligibility. And, in Texas, the state legislature has considered multiple bills targeting one particular county, Harris County, that would hamper election administration -- notably, authorizing the Secretary of State to exercise extreme, indefinite oversight over the day-to-day activities of the county elections.
How to Fix Voting Inequities
Voting inequities have to require congressional action. The following ideas have been pitched for many years. The Freedom to Vote Act touched on many of these ideas; although, to be comprehensive, it should contain more.
Make Election Day a Holiday
This is a simple idea that makes it easier to vote. The common barrier for voters is getting time away from their jobs. Nationally, there is no law that requires voters be provided time off to cast their ballot so the policy is made by the states 2. A national holiday would remind Americans that voting is important. Whether it is a non-working holiday is not important. At the very least, it should be mandated that voters are provided time off with pay to vote.
Set Standards for Early Voting, Mail Voting, Drop Boxes, Voter ID
Almost all states offer some form of early voting but the length of the early voting period varies by state. Alabama, Mississippi and New Hampshire do not have early voting or require an excuse to vote in-person absentee ballot. Given that the logistics to support several days of voting has a wide range of difficulty, legislating early voting is not very easy. Still, minimally, it should be offered at each county's Registrar of Voters location and/or City Hall and through a weekend period.
A little more than half of the states allow absentee ballots. Ballots can be returned by mail or at any polling place. Voters who wish to do so may still cast their ballot in-person at a polling place. It should be noted, though, that in some of these states, additional steps (such as requiring a notary or witness signature or photocopy of acceptable identification) are imposed that can create barriers to voters. A very small number of states conduct all-mail elections, where every eligible voter is mailed a ballot without having to request one. All-mail elections allow voters more options to cast their ballot. The minimum legislative act should be to make voting by mail easy, equitable and standardized. This means removing additional steps. Ideally, all states should opt into all-mail elections.
Many states offer voters the option of returning their absentee ballots to a secure drop box, administered by election authorities. The states take a variety of policy approaches to ballot drop boxes, with some states requiring they be accessible statewide, while other states limit, restrict or even ban the option. Ballot drop boxes should be available at all county and city central locations at the minimum.
In California, when registering to vote, the prospective voter is checked against various state records and verified against the current prison roster. If the voter votes in-person, they are asked questions about their date of birth and address(es) for verification. When the voter returns their mail-in ballot, the signature is checked manually against these systems. 3 Nationally, ID requirements should be standardized. IDs should only be required at the polling place when a citizen registers to vote or has to resolve/change an unmatched signature or new information (such as address).
While we're at it, why not an automatic voter registration? 22 states already do it!
Finally, there should be consistency about restoring voting rights to people with past felony convictions who have completed their terms of incarceration. Such laws would restore voting to thousands and have particularly strong benefits for Black and Latinx citizens who are disproportionately incarcerated for felony convictions. (Again, 22 states are already doing this.)
Protect Election Workers
In recent years, election officials have received death threats and online harassment, partisan interference with their jobs and have been subjected to the risk of criminal prosecution for minor infractions imposed by new state-level laws. Existing federal laws protect voters from intimidation but have not address intimidation against election workers. Only five states has passed laws prohibiting anyone from intimidating election workers or interfering with their duties. This should be enacted nationally.
Standardize Redistricting
Every ten years, voting district boundaries are re-drawn to coincide with the fluctuations in population (based on data from the US Census). Representatives to state assemblies and the US House of Representatives are determined by voters within these voting districts. All districts within the state must have populations that are roughly equal to one another. The issue is deciding where to draw the boundaries so the composition of the population is fairly represented.
Gerrymandering is the drawing of these boundaries in a way that gives one party an unfair advantage. It can be used to either spread voters from the opposing party across districts or to give a competitive edge to their own candidates. Conversely, voters from the opposing party can be packed into a minority of voting districts to reduce the number of seats the opposing party can control. Many of the seats won at the national and state levels during the 2016 election were the result of at some level of gerrymandering by both Democrats and Republicans.
Here are examples of gerrymandered districts in Montgomery, AL and Baltimore, MD. Obvious signs are that boundaries resembles a duck or snake or earmuffs -- a sign that mapmakers played games with the contours in order to ensure a particular electoral outcome.
Clearly, redistricting needs to be fair. The Freedom to Vote Act was an attempt to enhance transparency, strengthen protections for communities of color, and ban partisan gerrymandering. It, also, improved voters' ability to challenge gerrymandered maps in court. One of the more practical solutions, at a state level, involves shifting the responsibility of redrawing boundaries to independent commissions. Arizona, California, and Idaho already use independent commissions to produce voting district maps that are both just and fair.
Scrap the Electoral College System
Since 1824 (which was the first US presidential election where the popular vote was recorded), there have been five elections where the successful US presidential candidate did not receive a plurality of the popular vote. Since 2016, as a result of Donald Trump's election to presidency based on electoral count rather than popular vote, today's unbalanced Supreme Court continues to dismantle precedents that protect our rights and resolve inequities.
The US Constitution does not require states to hold a popular vote; however, since 1880, electors in every states have been chosen based on a popular election. In 48 of the 50 states, state laws mandate the winner of the plurality of popular votes receive all of that state's electors. 4 In Maine and Nebraska, two electors are assigned as such. The remaining electors are allocated based on the plurality of votes in each of their congressional districts (another example of the importance of controlling gerrymandering).
The founding fathers believed the Electoral College system was a way to protect the rights of smaller states where states can design their own way for choosing their electors without federal involvement but it has not worked as planned. Getting rid of the Electoral College would take a constitutional amendment and, with today's composition of the Congress, it is not likely. But there are a myriad of reasons that both parties would benefit from a popular election.
First, every vote would count. Over 5 million registered Republicans in California would count. Nearly 23,000 registered Democrats in Wyoming would count.
Secondly, the 50 states are not walled-off from each other which means the state-level freedoms or restrictions imposed do not only impact the state where the laws were enacted. Guns cross state lines. People who need abortions cross state lines. Popular elections would ensure that the freedoms and rights are equally distributed across all states.
Finally, the whole electoral vote certification fiasco in 2021 would have been moot. The fact that we're still discussing Trump losing in 2016 because he was owed the electoral votes in certain swing states is absurd. Clearly, if the Electoral College still stands, the loopholes to certifying electoral votes would have to be closed legislatively.
A Call to Action
The Freedom to Vote Act has already passed the House. The Republicans refused to accept the bill last year and Senator Manchin (yes, the same Senator Manchin that originally proposed the bill) refused to abandon the Senate filibuster tradition, which requires 60 senators to advance a bill. (A future post about filibustering is in the works.)
President Biden voiced frustration that this stalemate was a break from past precedent when both parties rallied behind the issue. "Not a single Republican has displayed the courage to stand up to a defeated president to protect America's right to vote. Not one." he said. This moment, like other consequential moments in history, he said, provides a binary choice. "Do you want to be the side of Dr. King or George Wallace? Do you want to be the side of John Lewis or Bull Connor? Do you want to be the side of Abraham Lincoln or Jefferson Davis? This is the moment to decide, to defend our elections, to defend our democracy."
Having a Congress that, as a whole, doesn't take its responsibility to represent its people is part of the problem. This means that, individually, we must act as one unit by voting and supporting the right candidates that will ensure protection of the unprotected and, if compelled, writing to our representatives to make this an important issue. Also, volunteering for organizations that get out the vote becomes crucial these days.
Every person's vote should count -- even if they are not the same as our own. Democracy runs on the concept that, as a whole, we will make the right decision.
Footnotes:
1These laws are categorized as restrictive if it contains one or more provisions that make it harder for eligible Americans to register (i.e., stricter photo ID requirements for voter registration), stay on the voter rolls (automatic purging of voters based on unreliable information), or cast a ballot (i.e., photo ID requirements for in-person voting, restricting access to mail voting) as compared to existing state law.
2 37% of the population live in states that do not have Election Day as a holiday and do not require employers to provide paid time off for voting. Some states, like California, require employers to provide paid time off for voting but do not have Election Day as a holiday. Other states have Election Day as a holiday but do not require employers to provide paid time off for voting.
3 If the signature does not match, a request for resolution is sent to the voter. The voter can either resolve it personally at a polling place or at the Registrar of Voters location or by mail (by submitting proof).
4 States generally require electors to pledge to vote for that state's winning ticket. To avoid faithless electors, most states have adopted various laws to enforce the electors’ pledge.
Sources:
Brennan Center for Justice (https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/voting-laws-roundup-june-2023)
Movement Advancement Project (http://www.mapresearch.org)