Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Not all poll workers got the message that voter ID law wasn't in effect for this election



“No ID? No vote!” These were the words that Fern Leard heard when she tried to vote last Tuesday in Lackawanna County. The voter ID law had been suspended for this election, but it seems someone had neglected to inform her precinct’s poll workers.

Or perhaps they were just confused. Under the federal Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002, any first-time voter at a precinct needs to present ID. Fern was indeed a first-time voter at that precinct, but the list of allowed ID’s under HAVA is much more expansive than the ID’s deemed acceptable by the state’s voter ID law, and includes a variety of photo and non-photo IDs. 

So Fern had brought her voter registration card, but after presenting it was told she could not vote because it was not photo ID. Her protests fell on deaf ears, as did her request for a provisional ballot, which, under both the PA voter ID law and HAVA, is to be provided to any voter without ID. Instead, she was shown the door.

She wasn’t the only one. On November 6, the Election Protection 866-OUR-VOTE hotline phones were ringing off the hook. In the hotline command centers around the state, staffed by the ACLU and several other ally organizations, reports came in from hundreds of individual citizens and poll monitors all over the state that voters were being turned away at the polls or forced to use provisional ballots because they did not have ID. No sooner would the claim be filed and a lawyer dispatched to address it, the phone put down, then it would ring again with a new complaint.

Marcia Hatchett of Delaware County called the hotline when poll workers at her precinct told her ID would be required and her college ID was not sufficient. The first poll worker Marcia encountered made this claim. Then, as if the woman’s left-brain didn’t know what her right-brain was doing, she handed Marcia a flyer that contained a list of acceptable ID’s, and there on the list was “college ID”.

The voter ID law would have in fact accepted a student ID from any state-accredited institute of higher learning as long as it had an expiration date. Marcia’s did. The HAVA for first-time voters at a precinct also include student ID.

But this was irrelevant, as the state voter ID law was not in effect, and Marcia was not a first-time voter at the precinct. She pointed this out to two other poll workers, demanding they allow her access to a voting machine as well as an apology for trying to deny her right to vote. Instead, she was shown the door. “You need to leave,” she was told by a poll worker pointing an accusatory finger at her.

Marcia called the Election Protection hotline, which encouraged her to return and try again. The second time around a poll worker told her she was in the poll book as a first-time voter and would have to show photo ID – a misstatement of the federal law. Marcia reminded them she had voted at this precinct in every recent election, but they refused to allow her in without photo ID. “Do you want to vote?” they repeatedly asked of her, as if her failure to passively comply with their unlawful requirements was what stood between her and the voting booth. Determined to cast a ballot no matter what, she showed her driver’s license, only to be refused admittance because the address did not match the one on her registration – another miscarriage of the law, which only requires a current address on the non-photo ID’s of first-time voters.

Eventually Marcia’s protests wore them down and she was allowed to vote. The same was true of Melissa Hobday Motley, who was only permitted access to a Montgomery County voting machine after she started to video the poll workers who were denying her entrance.

Melissa had been voting at that precinct for 10 years but had recently changed the name on her voter registration to match her official ID in order to comply with the PA voter ID law. The law, if it goes back into effect, will require all voters to have a state photo ID with a name that is closely matches the name on their voter registration. This is a particular issue for women who have changed their names due to marriage or divorce.

Although Melissa had added her husband’s name after her maiden name on her voter registration, the update was not listed in the poll book. Instead, there was a star next to her name and she was being required to show ID, which she had not brought because she knew the voter ID law was suspended. She said she saw stars next to many names.

Anecdotal reports from voter and poll monitors indicate that many people were incorrectly categorized as first-time voters at their polls this year.

“What is the role of the government and elections officials on election day? Isn’t it to facilitate voting – not obstruct it?” asked Fern. After being curtly told “No ID? No vote!” despite showing her voter registration card , it was a fair question. She was with her 17-month old twins, both of whom have health problems; her son was crying loudly. You’d understand if she had other things on her mind. But Fern’s anger about her difficulty voting three days ago was still palpable.

“I went back in there, and when the poll worker asked for ID again I took her picture. She asked `what was that for?’ and I told her `Because I think people should know what voter suppression looks like.’ Another poll worker, or maybe it was the judge of elections, came over at that point and corrected the woman and told her that a voter registration card was valid ID for first-time voters.” Fern was allowed to vote.

“They messed with the wrong person. I’m educated. I know my rights. But I have friends who told me similar stories. Think of all the people who didn’t know their rights and weren’t allowed to vote.”

--Emily Cleath, voter ID organizer, ACLU of Pennsylvania

Labels: , ,

Friday, December 23, 2011

2011 in Review: A Six-Year Court Battle Over Voting Rights Education


Many Pennsylvanians, including some parole and probation officers, are not aware that ex-offenders retain their right to vote. Thanks to an ACLU-PA court victory, Pittsburgh buses will soon carry advertisements informing people of the truth.

Pennsylvania law allows ex-offenders to vote once they are released from prison, even if they are still on parole - but confusion about this law leads to misunderstanding and misinformation, and many eligible voters are denied their right to vote, or assume they will be turned away. When the ACLU-PA and Pittsburgh League of Young Voters partnered to promote awareness of ex-offender rights, the Pittsburgh Port Authority turned away their ads.

In August,the Third Circuit ruled the Port Authority violated the First Amendment. Although the Port Authority claimed the ads violated policy, the court held that rejection was based on the message. After six years of legal battles, we finally have the opportunity to educate Pittsburgh bus riders that ex-offenders have the right to vote.  We hope to run the ad on Port Authority buses in advance of the October 9 registration deadline for the 2012 general election. Equally important, this decision establishes precedent protecting freedom of speech from government censorship in public forums.  
Read more »

Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, December 02, 2008

WSJ takes note of downfall of anti-immigrant crowd


Updated below

You may recall my post-election reaction to the downfall of hardline, anti-immigrant politicians. Today the Wall Street Journal also took note of "More Immigration Losers".
Virginia Republican Congressman Virgil Goode's narrow loss to Democrat Tom Perriello became official last week, and it caps another bad showing for immigration restrictionists. For the second straight election, incumbent Republicans who attempted to turn illegal immigration into a wedge issue fared poorly.

(snip)

Immigration wasn't a dominant issue this fall, and other factors contributed more to the GOP defeat. But the political reality is that Republicans who thought that channeling Lou Dobbs would save their seats will soon be ex-Members.

America's Voice did an excellent post-election analysis, before the Goode loss, called "Fenced In" (pdf). (I love that title.) The report looks at 21 congressional races that included an extreme anti-immigrant candidate. In 19 of those races, the extremist lost.

AV also produced this inspiring video before the election.



It's time for elected officials and candidates in Harrisburg and in Washington to come to grips with this reality: Hating on immigrants is the best way to a quick retirement.

Updated, 3:58pm:And there's this from political observer Charlie Cook, who surveyed Republican strategists. One strategist had this to say:
"Fourth, stop being [misguided] on immigration. We are alienating huge parts of the electorate, we are turning our primaries into single issue 'hate' contests and ignoring the single fastest growing bloc of voters in the country."

Andy in Harrisburg

Labels: , ,

Friday, August 15, 2008

Friday First Amendment Roundup: August 15, 2008

I'm pressed for time this week, so this is going to be both late and half-assed. I didn't want to miss a week. Sorry for phoning it in.

We've talked a bit about concerns for
a free press at the Beijing Olympics; amid the several scandals that have come from the Olympics thus far, we have this terrific YouTube video of ITV correspondent John Ray being arrested for covering a "Free Tibet" protest. My favorite part is when he opens the window and continues his report from inside the police van that's arresting him.



There have also been indications that the Chinese government is suppressing investigations of the stabbing that killed one family member of the US Men's Volleyball coach and injured another. Reporters in China have had their notebooks and tape recorders confiscated.

***

In Massachusetts, the state is fighting hard to make permanent a temporary restraining order against
three MIT students who announced a security flaw they had discovered in state transit subway cards; the students, and many around the internet, are claiming that the restraining order violates the students' speech rights, and that the case raises questions about free speech rights for hackers and security firms. According to CNet (see link above) and several other sources, prior Supreme Court rulings would seem to side with the students - however some say the current court's ruling in Morse v. Frederick ("Bong Hits 4 Jesus") may indicate otherwise.

***

Henrico County, Virginia
has declared it illegal for anyone to ask for money, pass out fliers, or sell anything on any public roadway. It just wouldn't be a week in America if legislators in some podunk county didn't just up and declare themselves exempt from the Constitution.

The highlight of the Richmond Times-Dispatch article, for me, is this:

"[Richmond Times-Dispatch publisher Thomas] Silvestri asked county leaders to modify the ordinance so it wouldn't restrict the sale of newspapers "or other activities similarly protected by the First Amendment."

The supervisors, however, agreed with the county attorney's recommendation not to make an exception for any group. The new ordinance takes effect immediately."

By the way, please visit that Times-Dispatch article, if only to see the comments left by readers, who are almost unanimously in favor of this law. Incredible.

***

A former high school English teacher at Tippecanoe High School in Tipp City, Ohio was dealt a setback in a lawsuit challenging the non-renewal of her contract in 2001. Shelley Evans-Marshall was in her second year of teaching when she assigned several controversial books as part of a classroom unit on censorship. Marshall was summarily censored.

This week US District Judge Walter Herbert Rice ruled that the school board's right to control a school's curriculum outweighs the academic freedom of the teacher assigning reading materials.

One of the challenged books Marshall assigned, Siddhartha, was actually on the school's approved reading list. The other hot-button book, "Heather Has Two Mommies," was not assigned directly by Marshall - rather, Marshall told her students to choose books from the American Library Association's "100 Most Challenged Books" list. The school board elected not to renew her year-to-year contract based not solely on her assigning the books in question, but because she "refused to communicate with the administration and refused to be a team player."

So who's really to blame here? Librarians. Steven Colbert was right. Librarians are hiding something™.

Hey, at least the students got a really solid lesson on censorship.

***

A former police chief from the Pittsburgh suburb of Harmar is suing the township for reinstatement, saying that he was fired in retaliation for an ethics complaint he fired against a township supervisor - who happens to be the wife of the previous Harmar police chief, who was also fired and sued for reinstatement.

***

A U.S. District Judge ruled that it is unconstitutional for a library in Upper Arlington, Ohio to bar groups with a "quintissentially religious" purpose from using library meeting rooms. The library's standing policy allowed groups to discuss religion on the premises, but barred them from engaging in prayer, singing, or other "inherent elements of religious service."

Judge George C. Smith ruled that such policies constitute viewpoint discrimination and issued a permanent injunction preventing the library from using those policies to exclude groups from using its meeting rooms. He did not issue any ruling regarding the library's policy of precluding religious services.

***

Lastly, let's do a little feature I call Op-Ed Spotlight [has anyone noticed yet that I'm just making up features?]

  • Here's a Washington Times Editorial discussing the ramifications of last week's Third Circuit ruling against Temple University's former harassment policy.
  • Walter Brasch opines on the hypocricy inherent in George W. Bush's demand of greater freedom in China
  • Andrea Wittchen or Lower Saucon Township (PA) writes to The Morning Call to defend the rights of voter registration volunteers at the Lehigh Valley's annual Musikfest event. Her letter is in response to this August 7 article, about Obama campaign volunteers who dared to step outside the designated boundaries of "Free Expression Plaza."
Chris in Philly

Labels: , , ,