« previous | MUCK HOME | next »

Dem Bill Would Crack Down On Voter Caging
The 2008 election may be over, but the voter suppression wars that went along with it certainly aren't.
Eleven Democratic senators led by Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island today introduced a bill designed to make GOP operatives think twice about launching indiscriminate challenges on people's right to vote. The bill would outlaw challenges to voting eligibility that are based on unreliable information.
The bill appears targeted at the GOP's "caging" tactic -- in one manifestation of which, Republicans in Michigan and other states considered challenging the eligibility of voters who were on a list of people whose homes were subject to foreclosure.
It would also appear to cover the GOP effort we reported on in New Mexico last fall, in which the state party publicly announced its intention to challenge 28 mostly Hispanic voters, based on a grab-bag of suspicions. All of those voters were later shown to be valid.
Whitehouse said of the bill:
Last year's historic election proved that the right of an eligible voter to cast his or her vote is essential to our democracy.
The full press release, featuring quotes from many of the other senators, follows after the jump ...
Senate Bill Would Outlaw Notorious Voter Suppression Tactic
11 Senators Introduce Legislation to Sharply Limit Frivolous Challenges to Voter Eligibility
Washington, D.C. - Political operatives would be unable to challenge a person's right to vote (or register to vote) based solely on unreliable information if a Senate bill introduced today becomes law. U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), along with Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Russ Feingold (D-WI), Bill Nelson (D-FL), John Kerry (D-MA), Charles Schumer (D-NY), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Chris Dodd (D-CT), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) again offered legislation aimed at preventing the practice of "voter caging," a voter suppression tactic which has often been used to target minority voters.
"Last year's historic election proved that the right of an eligible voter to cast his or her vote is essential to our democracy," said Whitehouse, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and a former U.S. Attorney and Rhode Island Attorney General.
"The practice of voter caging chips away at core protections in our democracy. The very legitimacy of our government is dependent on the access all Americans have to the political process. Rooting out partisan voter caging tactics requires us to give federal officials the tools and resources they need to investigate and prosecute organized efforts to suppress the right to vote. This bill will do exactly that," said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy.
"There's no place for underhanded vote suppression schemes in our democracy," said U.S. Senator Bill Nelson, a Florida Democrat who's proposed a series of other election reforms including direct election of the president by popular vote. "This particular bill guards against attempts by political parties to game the system."
"Those engaging in tactics like caging have one goal - to cheat the system," said Kerry. "This bill will ensure that anyone interfering with our basic right to vote by carrying out such tactics will face the consequences. We should be focusing our energies on encouraging citizens to vote, not restricting access."
"Voter suppression and manipulation have no place in our democracy," said Senator Schumer, Chairman of the Rules Committee, which had jurisdiction over the bill in the last Congress. "To ensure underhanded tactics do not threaten the strength and legitimacy of our government, we must protect the right of all people to have equal voice and equal access to the voting booth."
"Ensuring eligible voters have free and open access to the ballot box is a fundamental right all Americans expect and deserve," said Harkin. "This bill will ensure that suppression tactics by a political party do not influence our elections."
"The use of this partisan technique by political parties and others threatens one of the fundamental pillars of our democracy - the right to vote," said Dodd. "This legislation will help protect voters against such underhanded tactics."
Senator Sherrod Brown said, "Americans are struggling with an economy and housing market in crisis, but the right to vote should not be jeopardized by either. As we work together to rebuild this country, we need to ensure that Americans have equal access to making their voices heard and their votes cast. This bill protects American families and our democratic principles."
The Caging Prohibition Act, which was first introduced in the 110th Congress, would prohibit interference with registration or voting based solely on unreliable information, such as a "caging list." Caging is a voter suppression tactic in which a political party, campaign, or other entity sends mail marked "do not forward" to a targeted group of voters - often minorities or residents of minority neighborhoods. A list of those whose mail was returned "undelivered" is then used as the basis for challenges to the right of those citizens to vote, on the grounds that the voter does not live at the address where he or she is registered. There are many reasons that mail is returned undelivered, however; an eligible voter could be overseas on active military service or a student registered at a parent's address.
The Caging Prohibition Act would mandate that anyone who challenges the right of another citizen to vote must set forth the specific grounds for that voter's alleged ineligibility and describe the evidence to support that conclusion, under penalty of perjury. Following allegations in 2008 that Republican Party officials in Michigan, Florida, Indiana, and Ohio were considering challenging the eligibility of voters who were on a list of people whose homes were subject to foreclosure, the sponsors updated last year's version of the Caging Prohibition Act to explicitly prohibit challenges based on the foreclosure status of a voter's residence.
The Caging Prohibition Act has been endorsed by a diverse coalition of civil rights organizations, including the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law, the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, and People for the American Way.
"Caging creates bad lists that are used to purge, challenge, and harass eligible voters," said Justin Levitt, a voter registration expert at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. "The Caging Prohibition Act would protect all Americans against operatives using uncorroborated, unreliable information to threaten their most fundamental rights. The time to put these safeguards in place is now, before we are swept up in the heat the next election."

















Well, this is good news and smart to do it right now. No more voter supression.
March 5, 2009 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd like to see voter caging charges brought under RICO statutes, complete with preemptive asset seizure as part of things. That might make these criminals think twice about such things.
March 5, 2009 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Boy do I like Whitehouse. He doesn't just forget about this stuff like so many other senators do. He really gets how important it is to put a stop to these tactics and he stays on it. I guess it's what you should expect from a former U.S. Attorney and state Attorney General.
March 5, 2009 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
My gut response is that this is window dressing of the wrong kind.
Harassment of voters should be treated as a crime if it's not already a crime. The problem here is that "caging" is a sometimes a legitimate basis for questioning a voter's eligibility. We should also look at the total levels of harassment versus legitimate concerns. If this is about 28 voters here or there, I think it's ludicrous.
People sometimes do vote where they don't live, and that's wrong. Correcting that via a list, caging list or not, isn't necessarily a bad thing. If the voter doesn't register in the new location, the fault is with the voter. With rights come responsibilities.
Questioning the right to vote is not the same a preventing a voter from voting. It's often resolvable via "provisional ballot" use. This while a slight burden to both the voter and the vote counting process is not something to get up in arms about, unless, again, there is a pattern of illegal harassment.
This bill in my opinion, based solely on the TPM article and common sense, goes too far in paying lip-service to progressive principles at the cost of Constitutional and pragmatic principles. Harassment should be treated under existing law.
Smart government doesn't mean "more laws for marginal conduct issues".
March 5, 2009 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Huh? That has got to be the silliest post that I ever read.
Yeah, I have a solution. Let everyone vote on the internet or by mail. That would save a ton of time and money. Also, it will save your buds from wasting money sending registered mail from the rnc to poor people who won't sign for it.
Pathetic.
March 6, 2009 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Looks like you misposted your reply to someone else under my comment.
March 6, 2009 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
No I did not. I thought you were a troll at first and then saw that you have other posts and hail from san francisco. Sir, a polling place and your polling experience in san francisco is completely different from what goes on in ohio, missouri, and most of the southern states. Caging is not legitimate and is a farce employed to intimidate and preclude people from voting. All this complexity associated with voting is solely for the purposes of precluding people from voting. That's the goal and it usually is successful. However, last time there was such a flood of people that the standard attempts to preclude people from voting were unsuccessful.
The simple solution is voting by mail and over the internet. It would save a ton of time, money and effort. You make it easy for people to vote and you would have 90% plus voter participation and the republicans would have 10 senators, maybe, and 50 house members. All these bs rules and game playing are quite frankly ridiculous.
March 7, 2009 7:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
"People sometimes do vote where they don't live, and that's wrong." How often is "sometimes"? That's not a niggling detail. These caging lists would disenfranchise tens of thousands of legal voters to stop tens of people voting in the wrong place. I think that makes it clear the purpose is to stop legitimate voters who might vote for the wrong party.
"It's often resolvable via "provisional ballot" use." Have you ever had to use one of these things? There's a reason they're called "placebo ballots". The percentage that get counted varies widely jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but a large minority at least don't get counted. There are usually laws guaranteeing voters can take unpaid time off work to vote, but there's no such protection for confirming your identity after the election to get your vote counted, so low-income people --- the same people consistently targeted by these caging lists --- have to take more time off work without pay, assuming they can afford it and are allowed to. Moreover, if you have people trying so hard to stop you from voting, you might decide you won't be allowed anyway, so why bother?
March 5, 2009 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
How often indeed, but the burden is on those who want a new law to show how important it would be quantitatively. In fact it could be just the other way around from how you'd have it.
I've been a poll worker, and I've helped with provisional ballots. It's not a big deal. The intimidation factor we should worry about is thugs in uniforms menacing people who go to the polls or to register, not mild-mannered list checkers making sure people vote in the right precinct.
The rest of your nightmare is mostly hallucination. Get more exercise!
March 5, 2009 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
You need to get out of your polling place more. You saw only a tiny bit of the process, and you make the mistake of thinking your experience is universal.
March 6, 2009 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, I don't make that mistake. You mistake your stupid fallacies and unspoken anecdotes for good points of argument or criticism.
You believe in some fairy tale while I have real world experience.
March 6, 2009 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
This doesn't come near to addressing the issue.
In fact the firing of the prosecutors was exactly for this reason.
They failed to bring false charges against voters as part of a wider intimidation plan that was part of roves strategy to insure republican elections.
The evidence is clear that repression of voters and the miscounting or non counting of votes is what enabled bush to win both elections.
These are the areas that rove who was behind this needs to address in front of congress.
Don't hold your breath.
March 5, 2009 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
The big question is what level of penalties we're talking about. The GOP is already under court order not to cage, and the only judicial response to instances of caging has been to say "bad party, don't do that again." Perhaps even better than jail time for the peons involved would be fines, say $100K per caged voter, payable by the cagers'party. And split between the government and the voter.
March 5, 2009 8:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
The criteria for a perjury rap, as described, seem rather vague. Are we likely to see any actual indictments and convictions under the law?
This will continue until people go to jail for it. They will do what they have always done--break the law in the runup to an election, then pay a fine afterwards. Cost of doing business.
March 6, 2009 12:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
This caging process has been going on for a long time. It's not a recent issue, but it has been raised in the last few elections. It has been a known fact that the people of color have been the target of these practices by the Republican Party in the southern states. I agree that it should be procesacuted under federal law. Remember the Bush/Gore election in Florida with dear ole Kathleen on TV signing the results sheet before all the votes were counted.
Every registared voter has the right to vote and should not be denied by the bigots who try to tilt the results one way or the other.
March 6, 2009 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree, but challenging a voter is not the same as denying that voter the right to vote.
March 6, 2009 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are missing the point of "Caging", eds...in Republican leaning states they use this information to purge the voting roles - so when you show up, you aren't registered to vote.
What you are mixing up is verifying a voters address as opposed to challenging their right to even vote by making their registration invalid.
March 7, 2009 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink