Help In These Times raise $5,000 in two weeks! Donate now!
PrintDiscuss
Features » August 20, 2004

Party Hacks

Election chiefs trim voter rolls to benefit GOP

By Hans Johnson

Tags   
Share   Facebook Digg del.icio.us Newsvine   StumbleUpon Reddit Furl Propeller

It’s the kind of preaching so common in conservative circles that it slips past the public. In May, a Minnesota state official told a prayer group in May, the “five words” that are “probably most destructive” in the nation today are “separation of church and state.”

Such an assertion by a public servant would have drawn shrugs were it not from Secretary of State Mary Kiffmeyer, whose duty is impartial administration of elections. And her remarks might have escaped wider attention had she not later justified them, claiming victim status for right-wing Christians: “There are a lot of good church people who don’t think they can be involved in government.”

Kiffmeyer’s defense of greater church involvement in the democratic process appears curious in light of rules she proposed that would have had precisely the opposite effect on most Minnesotans. Kiffmeyer recently decided that in order to vote in November every would-be voter in the state must show an ID reflecting an “exact match” to the file of names, driver’s license numbers and dates of birth circulated by her office. Such rules would have the effect of robbing the vote from thousands of state residents, including those who encounter errors in the information about them on Kiffmeyer’s official list.

Minnesotans are not alone in facing gaps in electoral integrity from schemes like those concocted in 2000 by Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris. A nationwide review reveals a disturbing pattern in closely contested states of Republican office-holders with close ties to the Bush-Cheney campaign: Remove eligible voters from official rolls and erect barriers to new or young voters and minorities who vote overwhelmingly Democratic.

An administrative law judge nixed Kiffmeyer’s required ID matching in a ruling on July 22 but did not dismantle a second barrier she erected. Many county officials say her cumbersome voter-registration form deters would-be applicants. In St. Paul’s Ramsey County alone, more than a third of 6,500 completed forms submitted earlier this year contained errors and were rejected.

Instead of allowing a clearer, easier form after learning of such problems, Kiffmeyer, cribbing a line from the Bush reelection playbook, demanded continuity amid a crisis she helped create. “We are in midstream in an election cycle,” she told the St. Paul Pioneer Press. “We have an application out there … and we’ll continue to use that.”

In placing hurdles before voters, conservatives are nothing if not consistent.

Missouri has been a hotbed of election intrigue since November 2000 when a high turnout of African-American voters embarrassed then-Sen. John Ashcroft, who narrowly lost to the deceased Mel Carnahan. Since then, Sen. Kit Bond (R-Mo.) has pushed for and won provisions in the federal Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) that stiffened ID requirements involving new registrants and voters across the nation. Matt Blunt, the GOP secretary of state, also faced pressure from his right-wing base to tighten ballot access.

Missouri conservatives hoped their strategy of policing access to the ballot would bear fruit in the August 3 primary, the state’s first major election since implementing HAVA. Instead, it was Bond who felt the perils of aggressive purging of state voter lists. His name was struck from records in his hometown of Mexico, where he has voted for 40 years, and he had to produce a photo ID and voter identification card in order to vote for himself.

Bond’s experience may be Exhibit A in a larger case. Litigation seems likely after dozens of St. Louis residents had to seek assistance from NAACP volunteers to get a ballot from election monitors who didn’t find them on rosters. One woman, who had recently changed apartments within the same building, faced rejection at her polling place even though she was registered at the address.

In New Hampshire, Republicans have made a pastime of resisting young voters in college towns. Students in the university town of Durham turned out to vote in 2002, only to receive a handout from election proctors laced with scare tactics, including the warning that they could jeopardize their financial aid by voting at an address other than their permanent home.

The strategy successfully diminished turnout, and Democrats felt the sting. The GOP took full control of state government, rolling from parity in the state senate to a rollicking 18-to-6 majority. In the next session on strict party-line votes, they promptly pushed through a sweeping bill to limit access to voting and toughen sanctions for fraud.

This spring, the state’s Republican House Speaker Gene Chandler put a razor-fine point on the motives behind the law. “It is simply not right to allow college students to have any say in our elections in New Hampshire,” he told a public forum. “We need to control that.”

Other episodes show that Harris’ Florida exploits were only the beginning.

  • In Michigan, Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land doubles as the state chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign. In this capacity, she gives fundraising pitches for Bush and shows her penchant for strategic arithmetic. “If we all signed up 17 new voters and worked 17 hours for our president,” she told a gathering in Holland, “Bush will win Michigan.”
       Land continues to enforce a 2000 law that has effectively barred thousands of college students from voting. The Detroit Free Press reported in 2002 that in its first two years, the law dissuaded thousands of student voters from registering near campus, cutting voter rolls by 10 percent in East Lansing and 8 percent in Ann Arbor. The law already has claimed one high-profile casualty: Democrat Dianne Byrum lost her race for Congress to conservative Mike Rogers by 88 votes in a district that included the liberal college town of East Lansing. As a state legislator, Rogers was both sponsor of the law and its foremost beneficiary.
  • In Colorado, Secretary of State Donetta Davidson faces embarrassment over her leadership in the Elections Center, a nominally nonpartisan state office that has accepted donations from e-voting companies at the same time it touted their machinery. She also backed the scheme, shot down in state court, to allow partisan redrawing of congressional districts in 2003.
  • In South Dakota, Secretary of State Chris Nelson is facing lawsuits from Lakota tribes for posting erroneous warning signs at polling places during the June 1 special election for Congress.
       Jacqueline Johnson of the National Congress of American Indians told the New York Times that several ballot locations displayed signs reading “No ID, no vote.” Many would-be voters went home feeling intimidated by election monitors who did not inform them of their right to complete an affidavit, which, even with no ID, would allow them to cast a ballot. (HAVA allows for provisional ballots for voters who don’t provide ID or fill out an affidavit, these are much more likely to be disqualified than regular ballots.)
       The ploy apparently worked. Fewer Lakota turned out to vote than in 2002, when counties with high percentages of Indians saw participation rates soar in a Senate brawl in which the White House jumped in to oust Democratic incumbent Tim Johnson. In a dramatic 11th-hour turn, those counties were among the last to report their totals, and their margins reversed a small lead for Republican John Thune and gave Johnson a narrow win.
  • In Ohio, Secretary of State Ken Blackwell has gone several extra miles to endorse a federal constitutional amendment to ban marriage for same-sex couples. In July, before a failed cloture vote doomed the GOP proposal, Blackwell flew to Washington to rally senators—despite his duty in the Buckeye State to impartially oversee the validation of signatures on petitions submitted to place a question before voters this fall about amending the state constitution to ban gay marriage.
  • In Florida, GOP mischief with voting rolls is making perhaps the most glaring mockery of fair play and open government. Harris’ successor Glenda Hood remains embroiled in fallout from her bid to pare 47,000 supposed felons from the state voter lists. Recent disclosures show that Hood’s list wrongly excluded hundreds of Latino felons, who, in Florida, often back GOP candidates, while it included hundreds of African-American felons who had won restoration of their voting rights. Newspapers investigated and spotted the list’s inherent partisan bias after a judge ordered the list be made public, and Governor Jeb Bush retracted it.

Many voters, like St. Petersburg Times columnist Howard Troxler, found their amazement commingled with anger. “They do not get to stand there week after week, all self-righteous, declaring that anybody who questions their list is a fool,” Troxler wrote in July. Does this mean, he asked, that Jeb Bush is “gonna get our $2 million back or fire somebody?”

Like hawks who soften when loved ones get in harm’s way, even the most brazen advocates of election barriers sing a different tune after facing Election Day stop signs. After his brush with exclusion from the voter rolls, Kit Bond told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, “I tell you what. Voting is not easy.”

  • Help In These Times publish more articles like this. Donate today!
  • Subscribe today and save 46% off the newsstand price!
Hans Johnson, a contributing editor of In These Times, is president of Progressive Victory, based in Washington, D.C., and writes on labor, religion and the mechanics of political campaigns.

More information about Hans Johnson
Tags   
Share   StumbleUpon Facebook Digg del.icio.us Reddit Newsvine Propeller Furl
  • subscribe to print magazine

  • Reader Comments

    How long before they hoist by their own petard?  People are getting wise to the dirty tricks aren’t they?  My least favorite of them is the wedge issue, and that is why I have a new wedge issue branding slogan similar to the McCluhan epithet, the medium is the message:

    The WEDGE is the issue.

    Of course this only one front, and it hasn’t been too successful lately.  the gay marriage ploy was spent long ago, so watch out for out and out election fraud.

    Posted by daniel luke on Aug 20, 2004 at 7:15 PM

    You write that in Michigan, the Secretary of State “continues to enforce a 2000 law that has effectively barred thousands of college students from voting.”

    In fact, this law merely requires students to vote at their primary residence (i.e., back home), which they can do by absentee ballot with less wait and difficulty than our service men and woman overseas.  (Pardon us if we’d just as soon have temporary residents from California or South Carolina vote in their own states rather than ours.)

    Are you suggesting that Michigan’s Secretary of State, a la Mayor Newsome, should violate rather than enforce a state law?

    Posted by Gary Glenn on Aug 20, 2004 at 7:47 PM

    Purging voter listS, and disinfranchising voters and redistricting is getting to be a very HIGH PRIORITY to Republicans.  This should be made a Felony and these people should be jailed for commiting these acts.  It will soon become ONLY Republicans can vote.  Then there won’t be a need to be a vote for we will be stuck with our dictators that are given the office by the Congress.
    Our constitution is being violated every time a citizen is not allow their right to vote just because the Right Wing wants to CONTROL our country.  Just as Hitler did.  This is AMerica, EVERY ONE, HAS THE RIGHT TO VOTE.

    Posted by Charlotte Wonn on Aug 21, 2004 at 5:14 PM

    Gary

    What’s the reasoning behind that 2000 law ? Even if they are “temporary” residents - most of at least 4 years with some staying longer or moving there altogether - they’re still Americans. Why the hurdles / absentee ballot requirement, which were originally set up for people outside the COUNTRY not in another state. Surely they should be able to register for the Presidential vote where they’re currently living ? I mean who decides what your primary residence anyway ?

    All in all, it’s a sad day in America when people hold “procedures” and “the process” in higher esteem than the principles and rights that the country was founded on.

    Posted by steve on Aug 22, 2004 at 5:07 AM

    Why give students a bunch of hassles about where their primary residence is?  American Corporations are now declaring their “primary residences” are outside the US to dodge taxes and worker laws. It seems that would be a much bigger fish to fry… except that it is being done with the implicit assistance of the American government.

    As Steve mentioned, many of those students spend four years at school, a growing portion of them year-round.  I know “permanent” residens who don’t spend as much time in one community and no one questions their priviliges. 

    BGM

    Posted by Brian on Aug 22, 2004 at 3:52 PM
  • extended discussion >>>Continued...

    Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 22 posts.

Appeared in the September 20, 2004 Issue
Also by Hans Johnson
If you like what you're reading, why not help pay for it?
IN THESE TIMES COMMUNITY MEMBERS
Help this website survive! Donate to In These Times now!