Printable Version Email to a Friend 
National Groups that are Here to Help
People for the American Way Election ProtectionProject or call 1-866-OUR-VOTE |
Nonprofits Fight Voter Suppression
- For more examples see the OMB Watch website Roundup: Recent Nonprofit Efforts to Protect Voting Rights
- Learn more about How Nonprofits Can Get Involved
- Read the Restrictive voter identification requirements (Project Vote)
In 2006 nonprofits are leading the charge to protect voters' rights and the integrity of the electoral process. State and local groups have partnered with national organizations that provide information and legal expertise to challenge new laws and regulations that inhibit peoples' ability to register and vote. Known as the "new voter suppression tactics", these laws place unnecessary burdens on nonpartisan, civic-minded groups that want to help people register and vote. Find out more about how these nonprofits are coping with this new challenge. The moral of this story is simple. You don't have to be a voting rights group to fight voter suppression!
New voter suppression tactics include:
- limits on voter registration drives
- using databases and inaccurate purges to keep voters off the rolls
- burdensome identification requirements for voters, and
- problematic voting technology.
These tactics are often promoted as measures to address voter fraud. But, is fraud really a problem? A May 2006 report by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission hints that the fear has been inflated. The report acknowledges that disagreements exist in the fraud conversation, but concludes, "On balance, more researchers find it to be less of a problem than is commonly described in the political debate." And nonprofits active in voter registration and mobilization efforts have found these tactics impede their ability to get qualified voters registered and voting.
Nonprofit efforts in the state of Washington, Ohio, Florida and elsewhere illustrate steps you can take in your community to beat back these restrictions at the grassroots level. For example, different types of nonprofits come together on a statewide basis to pool resources and demonstrate the widespread impacts of voter suppression laws and rules. These diverse groups include grassroots, religious, labor and advocacy organizations. In addition to their combined resources, they are able to get assistance from national groups that provide attorneys and help with media relations. They are using research reports, interviews with voters, outreach to the press and court challenges to address new voter suppression tactics.
Successful Litigation: Washington Association of Churches v. Reed
Lawmakers in Washington passed a rule barring citizens from voting in this fall’s elections unless the Secretary of State first succeeded in electronically matching identification data on their registration application with other government databases. This would have kept otherwise eligible voters off of voter rolls if there had been even a minor typographical error. With guidance and legal assistance from the Brennan Center for Justice in New York City, a coalition of nonprofits sued the state. Plaintiffs included the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), Service Employees International Union, Washington Citizens Action, and the Washington Association of Churches.
The federal court in Seattle struck a victorious blow for voting rights in August when it blocked this law. The judge in this case was unequivocal. "The Court does not consider a person's right to vote a mere 'detail' to be so easily dismissed. The public interest weighs strongly in favor of letting every eligible resident of Washington register and cast a vote."
This success was a direct of result of the plaintiffs coming together and pooling their efforts and resources. Justin Levitt, of the Brennan Center remarked that all of the plaintiffs, while not primarily voter rights groups, were "deeply involved in their communities" and were "familiar with each other." While these groups had disparate missions, each was engaged in voter registration, which gave them a common bond. The lesson to be learned here is cooperation. Collective mobilization of groups with similar experiences is the key. Get to know other groups engaging in similar activities in your community, and make it a priority to forge and further develop these common bonds. These relationships will prove to be mutually beneficial, especially if the problem will require litigation, which Levitt notes can be "costly and slow." When it comes to fighting voter suppression, there is strength in numbers.
More Examples of Successful Nonprofit Efforts
A growing number of successful challenges to voting rules that discourage voters from participating include:
- Florida A coalition won a legal battle on restrictions for voter registration drives by nonprofits. For details see the June 13, 2006 OMB Watcher Nonprofits Registering Voters Face New Restrictions about their suit, and OMB Watch report to read about their victory. However, voter suppression remains a problem in Florida, where election supervisors are refusing to register voters when there is not an exact match between registration information and driver license numbers or other identification. The League of Women Voters published an oped in the Miami Herald that describes the problems with this new policy.
- Ohio The state's failure to implement the motor voter law, which requires voter registration at public assistance program sites, has been challenged in a lawsuit brought by ACORN and two citizens. Details about the suit are available in a press release from National Voting Rights Institute. ACORN built a record documenting the problem by publishing a report in February 2006 that showed lack of compliance in six Ohio counties. They also conducted interviews outside public assistance agencies in Ohio’s three largest counties that found virtually no individuals were offered the opportunity to register. Statistics from state government were also used as proof in the suit.
- Texas The Lone Star Project's May 2006 research report lead to a legal challenge to absentee ballot restrictions passed in 2003. The five page report detailed how federal funds for fighting violent crime were used to indict a few minority senior citizens on alleged abuse of absentee ballots, and provides examples of racially biased training materials for election officials. More information is available on the Lone Star Project webpage.
A Key to Success: Have Good Relationships With Local Officials
The Brennan Center's Levitt has advice for nonprofits in a crucial area, government relations. He said, "I encourage nonprofits to stay actively engaged with government officials at the state and local level." He stressed the need for nonprofits to remain friendly with government officials and to keep them aware of their needs and problems. This can include the local election commissioner, Secretary of State and state legislators.
This is excellent advice. After all, the restrictions placed on voting rights come from legislatures and agencies at the state level. These laws are a result of input from many individuals and groups, including local elected and appointed officials. If officials are made aware of the potentially pernicious impact of voter restriction rules ahead of time, perhaps costly litigation can be avoided. This process may sound daunting to groups that are already busy with their primary mission, but Levitt pointed out a simple start. "Step one, turn to the local election official. They are receptive to the needs of voters."
Whatever you do, do something! Voter suppression cannot stand. For a more complete discussion of voter suppression fights around the country, please read the OMB WATCH article on what groups like yours have been doing.