« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
After Citizenship Challenges, Ballots Thrown Out in Georgia
A significant number of the almost 5000 Georgia voters whose citizenship was challenged before the election will not have their ballots counted.
Last week, about 4,770 voters were told they would have to vote on paper ballots because their citizenship was in question. It was then up to them to return to their local election boards with proof of citizenship.
In several counties, reports the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, about one third of those voters neither returned with the necessary documents, nor showed up to last-chance hearings late last week. As a result, in many counties at least, their ballots will be thrown out.
The issue is not merely academic for this year's election. Neither major candidate got 50 percent of the vote in Georgia's U.S. Senate race, forcing a run-off to be held December 2nd. Voters whose ballots were thrown out would presumably also be barred from voting in the runoff.
The state requires newly registered voters to verify their citizenship -- a requirement that has been questioned by the U.S. Department of Justice and is the subject of a lawsuit.
Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel -- who before the election was criticized by voting-rights groups for taking an overly restrictive approach to voting -- verifies citizenship by checking voter registration information against state records.
Handel has said that the only people who were checked were new voters or those who changed an essential piece of information on their registration form. But it's unclear on exactly what basis the citizenship challenges were made.
We'll keep you posted as things become clearer.
Josh
Zachary
I'd like to see the courts say that either everyone provides proof of citizenship, or no one does.
Doesn't voter registration usually require some kind of proof, anyway?
November 10, 2008 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've never had to prove citizenship to register. I'm 63 and have lived in several states.
November 10, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Same for me, and I'm 60 and have voted in every possible election since turning 21 and in 3 different states.
I've never been asked for proof of citizenship.
November 10, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
In Nevada, it's a 6 month requirement. I showed up with my electric and gas bills from my first six months. The only requirement thereafter was a valid driver's license with my correct residence address. It's not hard to prove just a pain-in-the-ass to get the necessary paperwork together.
November 10, 2008 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not a citizen because i have a drivers license or pay utilities. I am a citizen because I was born here.
If proof of citizenship is based on residency or drivers license then a large majority of our fellow citizens will be locked out.
Which is what the fearful hate mongers want so they can maintain control.
November 10, 2008 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Registering to vote usually requires only proof of residency such as a utility bill with your name and address on it. I've lived in: NY, DC, VA, WA, CA, IN, and UT and have never had to prove citizenship (despite living in areas with large immigrant populations as well as arguably the most conservative state in the union). GA is out on a limb - this sounds like the new "literacy" test.
November 10, 2008 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sure conservatives are claiming people didn't follow up their challenges because they weren't citizens. More likely they couldn't afford to take more time off work, especially with the election decided. Rachel Maddow is right, we're effectively allowing poll taxes by making voting this highly time consuming process. Also, all secretaries of state purge registratiton lists of people who haven't voted for years in order to remove people who died or moved. Seems like new registrations are most likely to be current.
November 10, 2008 12:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
The problem is the Constitution doesn't delegate the Government to conduct elections. Therefore, its' a State responsibility. And just like driver's licensing, each state does it their way.
What the Government should do is establish a set of Federal Guidelines for Conducting Elections which spells out how to determine citizenship equally so no one is disenfranchised. It could also address electronic voting machines and the need for an audit trail than can be reviewed for accuracy in the case of disputes.
But I forget my assigned position in all this. I'm only allowed to vote...not think. That's why we have government employees.
November 10, 2008 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's okay to be a Federalist, just don't trample on legitimate States' Rights!
Sometimes uniformity is good, sometimes diversity is better. In neither case is criminal conduct or vote suppression good, but non-citizens trying to vote should be caught out.
November 10, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Geez...how many non-citizens would be living in Georgia of all places. I'm sick of these people basing everything on what "could" happen rather than on what actually does. How many people are going to risk going to prison for one extra vote???
November 10, 2008 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
States that want to challenge things like citizenship should be required to challenge the registration of the voter prior to election day and not at the polling center and then require that the voter return with more paperwork. That's just ridiculous and amounts to a poll tax since you are requiring people to take time out of their day twice just to register their vote.
November 10, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree except in the case of late registrations.
November 10, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Challenges need to be done well before election day, and the rules must be applied uniformly to the voting population. Anything else is an invitation to abuse by state officials.
November 10, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Standardization of voting eligibility laws, standardization of early voting rules (as between different states) and standards for hours of voting machines available at each voting place should be part of the change in politics the Obama administration brings with the new Congress.
Meanwhile, the civil rights division of the new Justice Department should initiate investigations and prosecutions where appropriate, of the organized, systemized voter suppression efforts that have bedeviled the country to the extent of the statute of limitations. Break this dog of suckin' eggs.
November 10, 2008 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
as a constitutional law scholar obama will be the first to tell you that it's not up to the president (or the federal government) to 'standardize' voting in the states.
November 10, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was never defined in the Constitution to any branch of government. I believe the 10th Amendment states any thing not covered in the first 9 are reserved for the States to decide. So elections are in their ballpark.
November 10, 2008 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does living in more than one state raise questions about the validity of citizenship in this country? Are Americans "more", or "less", citizens of the country according to State Secretaries of State if they live in Georgia, say, than if in California?
Should high school seniors simply be registered as _citizens_ as well as voters at the age of eighteen, perhaps after a good education in civics? Oh, and then bused to the polls as I saw happening in, was it, New Orleans?
November 10, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm all in favor of a national voter ID/registration card. Most states give anyone a driver's license and a utility bill just proves you have utilities.
That being said, what do you want to bet that votes in those "lost" paper ballots are sufficient to change the election?
November 10, 2008 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Simple, yes. But as we've just experienced in the last 7 and a half years, all it takes is a President who places himself above the Laws and a Congress that pencils whips whatever he decides needs to be done without debate, a court system packed with judges of like minds, and the laws and rights enjoyed by all scuttled for some obscure rationale.
Such a voter registration as well as driver's license are the first steps towards a totalitarian state much like the NAZI's in Germany in the 1930's unless you have a fetish for your ID being tattooed on your arms. Best leave it to the States to work out with assistance from the Feds.
November 10, 2008 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Such a voter registration as well as driver's license are the first steps towards a totalitarian state much like the NAZI's in Germany in the 1930's unless you have a fetish for your ID being tattooed on your arms. Best leave it to the States to work out with assistance from the Feds.
Just a bit of hyperbole there. Lots of Western democracies have national ID cards and the like. I mean, what is a passport if not a nation ID card for use abroad?
The states are already in control of the situation and that's exactly why it's so fucked-up - 50 states with 50+ ways to vote. Stupid and unwieldy in the extreme.
November 10, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I remember when it was always clear from context whether a headline referred to the State of Georgia or the Republic of Georgia.
Those were good times.
November 10, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
All of us keep talking about reform and National Voter ID's & Registration. It is starting to take hold in the MSM. Here's a piece in today's LA Times:
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-voting10-2008nov10,0,3190626.story
It's generally positive to major reform, and the "We will need to think hard about this" side of National Reg/ID gets very little push from the author.
John
November 10, 2008 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure I could prove citizenship. Sure, I have an expired passport around somewhere, and a copy of my birth certificate even more tenuously findable. But who's to say I haven't sworn fealty for a foreign power since those documents were issued?
November 10, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
We need to consider a Constitutional amendment that allows Congress to set standards for Federal elections and registration, revokes the antiquated Electoral College, and guarantees all votes be counted equally. These are fundamental civil rights questions and States have shown all too often that they are happy to suppress the rights of various minority groups.
November 10, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
To those of you stating that under the doctrine of "state's rights" Georgia should be allowed to go its own way -- nice try. Since the 1966 US Supreme Court case of South Carolina v. Katzenbach, such claims have been unavailing.
You see, for over 140 years we have had a constitutional amendment that allows congress to set standards for voter registration, and for over 40 years congress has done so.
Under the guarantee of "equal rights under the law" of the 14th Amendment and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, the 8 "covered states" that used poll taxes or literacy tests to limit registration to under 50% of the voting age population (which includes Georgia) have had limited rights to amend their voter registration rules without "preclearance" of the courts or Attorney General. Sadly, the Bush administration has been the first AG's office to open the floodgates to preclearing changes in voter registration that arguably have a discriminatory effect. It's not the law, it's the administration of the law.
But regardless of whether these changes have or should have been precleared, Georgia and the other "covered states" (which includes Alaska, curiously) cannot suggest that who is eligible to register is a state law issue. Georgia's past history of racial discrimination has present consequences. Seems to me we fought a "great civil war" over this issue and the "state's rights" guys lost.
November 10, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
THIS. Thank you.
November 10, 2008 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is the controversy over 'citizenship', or 'residency'? In other words, are they questioning whether the voters in question are legal citizens of the United States, or if they are citizens, are they legal (under what terms) residents of GA, and eligible to vote there?
November 10, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
"But it's unclear on exactly what basis the citizenship challenges were made."
Seems clear as a bell. The "basis" was a likely Dem vote and an easily intimidated crowd.
What a weasel this woman is.
November 10, 2008 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
i kui ku: "...I'm all in favor of a national voter ID/registration card..."
Before anyone decides they are for it or against it, it needs to be clarified that no national voter ID database can be privatized to a company such as ES & S, which is done here in NM. The NM SoS office privatized the NM voter registration database to ES & S, and thousands of registered voters mysteriously disappeared from the lists in the poll books during the Democratic Caucus in February, 2008.
I wish the present discussion of a national voter ID system would include this critical consideration before so many jump on the ID card bandwagon!
November 10, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
The states may have the right to establish their own registration and voter validation procedures, but they need to be reasonable and consistent. The Federal government has invalidated some state practices in the past, like poll taxes and "literacy tests", and should not hesitate to do so in the future.
November 10, 2008 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uh, not really. Georgia is different from 42 other states. Any proposed new voting registration rules coming out of Georgia aren't simply subject to invalidation if they go too far -- they must be precleared. Georgia and the other "covered states" simply do not have the right to establish their own registration and voter validation procedures in our federal system.
The law is pretty clear. As I mentioned above, because Georgia is a covered state under §5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, it must submit any new voting “standard, practice, or procedure” for preclearance by either the U.S. Attorney General (or the District Court for the District of Columbia) in order to ensure that the change “does not have the purpose [or] effect of denying or abridging the right to vote on account of race or color,” 42 U.S.C. §1973c. Under the Act, no change should be precleared if it “would lead to a retrogression in the position of racial minorities with respect to their effective exercise of the electoral franchise.” Beer v. United States, 425 U.S. 130, 141.
I'm not sure what you are saying. Should we drop "preclearance" for Georgia by congressional repeal the Voter Rights Act? I would assert the opposite. The Act is fine - the new AG just needs to take it to heart and stop handing out preclearances like candy.
November 10, 2008 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Her attempt at being re-elected is on my "to do" list (A/K/A my "Johnny do list" and my "Johnny dodo list"). John Dickerson, Atlanta
November 10, 2008 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting... I'm a Fulton County (Georgia) resident and requested an absentee ballot for this presidential election. Even though I voted in the last Presidential election absentee, and in person in the 2006 election and primary, I was sent a a new voter registration card because they had "no record" of my voter registration. Huh? You did not 7 months ago when I voted in the primary.
Anyway, I sent that new registration back in, was freshly reminded why I didn't much care for Karen Handel when she was knee deep in North Fulton politics, and waited for my ballot. I did get one in time to vote absentee, but it was a good thing I did all this early, otherwise no vote for me!
I do wonder how many other long time voters they purged and if that is what happened to MY registration. I'd have been screwed if I showed up on Nov 4th with the intent to vote, wouldn't I?
November 10, 2008 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
DMK: "...Interesting... I'm a Fulton County (Georgia) resident and requested an absentee ballot for this presidential election. Even though I voted in the last Presidential election absentee, and in person in the 2006 election and primary, I was sent a a new voter registration card because they had "no record" of my voter registration. Huh? You did not 7 months ago when I voted in the primary..."
That sounds all too familiar. Do you know if the registered voter database is privatized to a comapny such as ES &S? If so, they can do all kinds of manipulations to it and there is no transparency and no accountability. This is a critical issue that needs to be clarified before we all jump on the national voter ID bandwagon. So far, no one seems to be interested, unfortunately. Except perhaps 17,000 New Mexican voters who got disenfranchised in February...
November 11, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink