« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Civil Rights Groups Seek to Stop Florida Voter Purge Law
Hans von Spakovsky, whose nomination for the Federal Election Commission is currently stalled in the Senate, may have left the Justice Department in 2005, but his influence remains. A prime example is in Florida, where the state legislature, evidently following von Spakovsky's advice, passed a law that could disenfranchise tens of thousands of legitimate voters. Now civil rights groups are trying to stop the law before it affects the 2008 elections.
The law, scheduled to go in effect in January, would require the state to reject voter registrations if the state cannot match the information on registration applications to driver's license or Social Security records. Because such records tend to be riddled with errors, tens of thousands of "perfectly eligible voters" will be knocked off the rolls, the NAACP and other groups charged in a lawsuit this September, resulting in “disenfranchisement-by-bureaucracy.” Compounding the problem, the law shortened the number of days that rejected voters have to present evidence that they're a legitimate voter from three to two days.
Florida was just one of a number of states that adopted such a law after von Spakovsky, then a lawyer with the Civil Rights Division, issued a letter to Maryland's attorney general in 2003 advising that the Help American Vote Act required states to reject voter registrations that did not match databases.
Joe Rich, the 40-year veteran of the Civil Rights Division who was then the chief of the voting section, told me that von Spakovsky wrote the letter without consulting him. Rich called it a "very strict reading of the law" which would "disenfranchise a lot of people" and compared it to Florida's disastrous attempt to purge ex-felons from the voter rolls in 2000 (a purge that was also von Spakovsky's brain child.)
Sending out letters that would result in mass disenfranchisement without consulting the career lawyers in the voting section was a kind of hobby for von Spakovsky at the Justice Department.
One of the states that adopted von Spakovsky's (or, as it seemed to them, the Justice Department's) advice was Washington. But a lawsuit successfully blocked its law, similar to Florida's, from going into effect. Justin Levitt, a lawyer for the Brennan Center, which has been involved in both lawsuits, said that only Florida, Iowa, and South Dakota still had such laws on the books.
The Florida lawsuit argues that not only would the law reject thousands of legitimate voters because of typos, misspellings, and the like, but that minorities are the most effected because Hispanic, Haitian, and African-American names in general tend to be more prone to transcription errors. The groups cite a report by the Social Security Administration that, "of 2.6 million voter registration records submitted to the SSA through February of 2007, 46.2% -- nearly half of the records – resulted in a failed match." Other state databases, such as New York, the lawsuit says, have failed to match approximately twenty percent of voter registrations to driver's license databases. The lawsuit is ongoing.
Last week, the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division wrote Florida's secretary of state to request more information about a number of aspects of the law, including a measure that would reduce the number of forms of identification that voters can use under the state's voter ID law. Under the Voting Rights Act, Florida cannot enforce any law with a substantial effect on voting without prior approval by the Department.
Rich, the voting section's former chief, called such a letter "routine" and said it wasn't a clear indication that the Department would reject the law. But interestingly, one of the areas that the Department requested more information about was its process of "verifying voter registration applications" -- its system of matching registrations to other databases. That means the Department will be reviewing whether its own advice (thanks to von Spakovsky) has resulted in discrimination against a certain class of voters. Given the current leadership of the voting section in the Civil Rights Division, however, it seems unlikely that the Department would change its mind.
As for von Spakovsky, the hold that Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL) and Russ Feingold (D-WI) have on his nomination to the FEC has resulted in a month-long deadlock, with no indications that a compromise is in the works. The term on von Spakovsky's December, 2005 recess appointment expires at the end of the year.
Comments (30)
Former Civil Rights Division attorney wrote on November 8, 2007 4:52 PM:That's "affected," not "effected" (speaking of typos).
erica wrote on November 8, 2007 6:07 PM:So, I have a question about wealthy Republicans (and maybe some Democrats too) who claim to "live" in Florida for tax reasons, but don't really live there.
Not that I'm suggesting the Dems should engage in disenfranchisement, but if they did, they should send "do not forward" letters to the homes of Republicans who "live" in Florida--in the middle of summer. All the poor little DNF letters would languish in those empty Florida villas and condos while their owners escape the heat in the Northern climes, planning to return right after the holidays and "live" in Florida until the end of March except for one week each in Vail and Chamonix.
That'd wipe out a few thousand Florida Republican votes right there.
(If I'm wrong about how this would work just let me know.)
IceJustIce wrote on November 8, 2007 6:44 PM:Or are Tanner, et al., trying to pretend like they have seen the light?
As someone in the Section told me today, if you put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig.
The mettle is not whether a more info request went out; it's whether an objection is interposed.
Bigger Thomas wrote on November 8, 2007 7:18 PM:Ah, more news on Mr. von Spakovsky. I bet this guy's parents were Nazis.
bob wrote on November 8, 2007 7:45 PM:Can we put more of the federal bureaucracy beyond the reach of future GOP administration political appointees?
We need to avoid this fox/henhouse dynamic every time a Republican gets elected president. It seems to only get worse and worse.
once again wrote on November 8, 2007 8:23 PM:The turtle. That's how he looks to me.
IceJustIce wrote on November 8, 2007 9:57 PM:Actually, Hans reminds me of Alfred E. Neumann.
Shout-out to my man Bigger.
Richard wrote on November 8, 2007 10:02 PM:"""That'd wipe out a few thousand Florida Republican votes right there."""
Yes it would and no Democrat should want to do that. Think about it.
Utopia wrote on November 8, 2007 10:45 PM:"von Spakovsky, ... issued a letter to Maryland's attorney general in 2003 advising that the Help American Vote Act required states to reject voter registrations that did not match databases."
Rejecting registrations is required by something called "Help America Vote"? And they say irony is dead!
U
Bigger Thomas wrote on November 8, 2007 10:48 PM:Hmmm. He looks more like Dr. Evil from Austin Powers to me, with hair.
Peace to ya, IceJustIce, baby......
IceJustIce wrote on November 8, 2007 11:40 PM:Send me some of your porn, Bigger, and keep an eye on your toaster...
Leslie Pool wrote on November 9, 2007 12:08 AM:von Spakovsky needs to come out of the closet and embrace his homosexuality, only then will he stop building his self-esteem off the backs of voters he disenfranchises.
Anthony wrote on November 9, 2007 7:06 AM:Actually, just put one of those tiny little moustaches on him.
ttc wrote on November 9, 2007 7:56 AM:the database matching is a fool's errand. the databases are riddled with errors, as they all acknowledge in their customer literature. resort to these privately operated databases is really a privatization of a government compliance function.
originally fla. used "choicepoint" as its data aggregator, a company with a product that wasn't industry standard in an industry where the standards are low to start with. "choicepoint" was owned, of course, by republican contributors. "choicepoint" bears as much responsiblity for making bush president as the US Supreme Court and Ralph Nader.
e-bay wrote on November 9, 2007 9:14 AM:Send no more of these photos. NO bidders!
gm wrote on November 9, 2007 9:57 AM:Let us not forget that "vote caging" (sending registered letters that are returned unclaimed and then challenging the addressee's right to vote) is wrong no matter what the political persuasion of the voter is.
MN USA wrote on November 9, 2007 10:14 AM:Why should anyone have to show photo ID to vote? In Minnesota a utility bill with your name and address on it or even a neighbor that will vouch for you can be used to register to vote up to and on election day. Once you're on the voting list, you simply go to the poll, give the poll worker your name, and sign next to your name. Voter records are examined after the election and problems resolved. We have few problems and every year have high voter turnout. Isn't that the idea -- to encourage all citizens to participate in elections?
snark wrote on November 9, 2007 10:58 AM:Would you let a guy with this photo ID vote?
WI Resident wrote on November 9, 2007 10:59 AM:Here in WI we follow pretty much the same procedure as in MN. We're good neighbors.
Ron Cantrell wrote on November 9, 2007 11:06 AM:Why don't we just go to the old purple finger system the repubs loved so much in Iraq?
dewey_m wrote on November 9, 2007 11:21 AM:Von Sparky is Republican filth of the highest order. Just look at his picture; you can clearly see (yet another) child in a adult mans body.
Mumphrey Bibblesnæð wrote on November 9, 2007 11:34 AM:"Hmmm. He looks more like Dr. Evil from Austin Powers to me, with hair."
dollared wrote on November 9, 2007 11:45 AM:Hair? I don't know; looks like a wig to me...
Maybe he really is Dr. Evil.
Dear Principled Democrats,
Remember what's at stake here. You rich, white college graduates can rest your conscience that you didn't disenfranchise anyone. But the Republicans are stealing billions of dollars from the Treasury, violating the Constitution with impunity, and literally stealing bread and opportunity from our less fortunate brethren. Rightly or wrongly, those folks depend on us to defend their rights and protect their American Dream.
And yet you would not use the other side's tactics to drive the other side out of power. You would rather lose nobly than win the way the other side wins. So.....I hate 30 second television ads a principal means of political persuasion. Should we skip those, as they are meaningless for making informed policy choices. I hate negative campaigning. So should we not make hay with Giuliani's ties to crooks like Kerik?
I know the answers to those questions for myself. And I'm with Robert Kennedy on this one. Whatever it takes, baby. I'm not going down the Mondale/Dukakis/Gore path ever again.
dollared wrote on November 9, 2007 11:53 AM:I'm still steamed. You want that Florida law overturned in a heartbeat? Do the caging of the snowbirds, now. Disenfranchise some rich white folks, and they'll be on local TV in an hour with a very, very sympathetic and outraged local TV reporter. Within a day, some Republican legislator will have proposed a bill to repeal the offending law, and everyone will have their voting rights restored.
It's very simple. Think of it as an application of equal protection. If you can make the law apply to white people with money, then it will get repealed.
Get practical, people. Please. One million Iraqis and six thousand Americans are dead, and we are $5Trillion further in debt, because we were all busy and too principled to fight fire with fire in 2000 and 2004.
soflbagman wrote on November 9, 2007 11:57 AM:Link to a McClatchy report on Florida disenfranchisement.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/21245.html
Rick B wrote on November 9, 2007 12:32 PM:GM
Let us not forget that "vote caging" (sending registered letters that are returned unclaimed and then challenging the addressee's right to vote) is wrong no matter what the political persuasion of the voter is.When one (crooked) party takes control of the government and acts to perpetuate its control rather than using government to benefit all citizens then others have to take steps outside of government actions to protect themselves.
Bush's occupation of the White House because of the crooked actions of Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris, as well as the Unconstitutional actions of the Republican-occupied Supreme court demonstrates clearly that we cannot trust our government institutions when they are occupied by the Republican Party.
Republicans believe that when they hold the government based on a slender majority of government-approved votes (that differs from attempted votes) that the entire institution of government belongs to them and they they do not need to negotiate fair procedures with their opponents or act fairly with the public.
It may require using their own tactics against them to make them recognize that they do NOT ~own~ the government they are misusing.
Rick B wrote on November 9, 2007 12:48 PM:Hmm - doesn't take blockquotes, does it? In my earlier comment, the first paragraph is GM's, and the rest is my reply.
Sorry
phil james wrote on November 9, 2007 1:34 PM:For evil to prevail requires only that good men do nothing.
Brad wrote on November 9, 2007 2:30 PM:If we accept that it's OK to use their tactics to defeat them, wouldn't we then have to accept torture, genocide, etc.
It always hurts in the short term to maintain your principles, but you usually win in the end.
Tramadol 50 mg FedEx next day free prescription wrote on November 15, 2007 6:12 PM:Buy Tramadol online