Regardless of whether New Mexico is a swing state this November, and whether Governor Susana Martinez becomes Mitt Romney’s running mate, the Land of Enchantment state remains a place to watch. New Mexico has hardly figured in national news about voter suppression, in part because the state doesn’t have a voter ID law that is currently being challenged, and in part because its secretary of state is starting its own massive voter purge only this week, a relatively late date in the wave of purges. But an on-the-ground updated we’ve received from New Mexico may change our perception. It comes from the latest community journalist to join our Voting Rights Watch 2012 investigation, and it challenges us to really think about what voter participation means.
Meet George Lujan. He’s the communications organizer for the SouthWest Organizing Project, and a contributor and editor for El Grito. He lives in the South Valley with his fiancée and their two dogs. While still a teenager, George began registering voters more than ten years ago, when he worked with SWOP’s youth program. Earlier this week, Lujan reported to us that the six counties have run out of English-language registration forms, while Secretary of State Diana Duran—the first Republican to hold the office in eighty years—has focused her attention on a voter-roll purge.
—Aura Bogado
Pennsylvania’s voter ID case continues this week, and so does the fight against voter suppression throughout the country. As students seek to organize around the Pennsylvania law, an online initiative seeks to register student voters. In New Mexico, meanwhile, several counties simply run out of registration forms. And Alabama becomes ground for a new redistricting fight. Here’s some of the latest voting rights news.
Online Registration Site Also Sends Reminder Texts
Eastern Michigan University became the twenty-fifth university to partner with TurboVote, a resource to get voters to fill out their registration forms online. Once completed, voters receive their already completed forms in the mail, ready for their signature to send out in a stamped and pre-addressed envelope. And in case you—like the rest of us—find it hard to keep up with every deadline and election, TurboVote will send you a text message to remind you. Started by two Masters students at Harvard’s Kennedy School two years ago, three campuses have already launched TurboVote and garnered nearly 10,000 members. As more community colleges and universities co-brand ahead of the fall term, co-founder Seth Flaxman tells us he’s excited to see how many voters will register before Election Day. Not a student? Don’t worry, TurboVote is for voters of all ages.
As Election Day approaches, we’ve seen increased reporting on voter suppression schemes. Journalists, lawyers, and academics are all weighing in, and our own project, Voting Rights Watch 2012, continues to investigate beyond the headlines, from a battle over the Voting Rights Act in Texas to purge lists in Florida and beyond.
But we’re also curious about what’s happening at the community level, and sparking a conversation about why communities that are often either ignored or bashed by elected officials of all stripes would care about voting rights in 2012. Last week, I introduced you to Miracle Randle, a rising college senior whose own family history inspired her get involved to defeat a ballot measure in Minnesota what would require ID to vote. Over the coming weeks, we’ll introduce you to more community activists and bloggers, who will explain what draws them to work against voter suppression. Several of them are also joining our Voting Rights Watch 2012 team as community journalists, offering additional eyes and ears in their districts and states.
One of those team members is James Cersonsky in Pennsylvania. He works with Philly’s Teacher Action Group and Asian-Americans United around education reform and community-centered pedagogy. Aside from his activism, he’s also a writer who will be sending us missives about how everyday people in Philly are organizing around the state’s voter ID law. This week, as the state’s Supreme Court hears a case challenging that law, James joined a group of voters who evoked the civil rights era Freedom Rides to highlight the racially biased impact of the law. Here’s his report from the bus to Harrisburg.
A new survey indicates that people who “harbor negative sentiments towards African Americans” are also more likely to support voter ID laws. And the correlation extends beyond party and ideological lines.
Researchers at the University of Delaware’s Center for Political Communication weren’t surprised to find that most Republicans and conservatives were in favor of voter ID laws—regardless of how they measured on the “racial resentment” scale used in the study. The shocker came when Democrats and liberals who rated highest on the racial resentment scale also indicated support for voter ID laws.
How likely one is to possess or be able to acquire a specific form of voter ID is also affected by race. The Brennan Center released a report illustrating, among other challenges to obtaining identification, the lack of overlap between offices that issue valid voter IDs and high populations of people of color. More than 1 million blacks and half a million Latinos live more than 10 miles away from such offices.
![]()
A coalition of groups led by the ACLU and the League of Women Voters made arguments in Minnesota’s Supreme Court yesterday against a ballot measure that would amend the state’s constitution to “require all voters to present valid photographic identification to vote.” The plaintiffs argue that the measure’s language obscures how the constitution would be changed. “Valid photographic identification” would only include those that were government-issued, and not other forms of ID, such as those issued by schools.
Minnesota remains one of only seven states that does not use a provisional ballot system. This measure would institute provisional voting, but lawyers argue that the measure is misleading because it makes no mention of the significant change to the way votes are counted when using provisional ballots.
Look up at your clock. By this same hour tomorrow, more than 1,500 US-born Latinos will have celebrated a milestone birthday, and turned 18. They’ll be eligible to vote in local, state and federal elections in their home states—but if that state is Texas, that right is under threat.
A case being heard this week by a panel of judges in DC will determine if Texas can demand strict forms of photo ID at the polls. The Lone Star State passed the bill and it was signed into law early this year. But what’s more broadly in question is the federal government’s continued power under the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
Under the Voting Rights Act, Texas, along with other states that have historically discriminated against people of color around elections, must seek preclearance from the Department of Justice for changes to voting districts or regulations. And in the case of Texas’ voter ID law, that permission was denied. Texas admits that more than 600,000 people lack the necessary identification required—but insists that the law isn’t discriminatory because no-cost ID will be made available, and voters who still lack ID will still be able to cast provisional ballots.
We’ve seen state officials around the country flat-out lie about the imaginary problem of voter fraud—and we’ve seen how people of color and other marginalized groups stand to have their rights swiftly confiscated in the process. This time, voters in Pennsylvania will feel the brunt of a bill signed into law this past March, which may disenfranchise nearly 10 percent of voters statewide and 18 percent of voters in Philadelphia.
Although Secretary of Commonwealth Carol Aichele has repeatedly stated that 99 percent of Pennsylvania voters were already in possession of the identification needed to comply with the new law, her numbers were way off. The deliberate or accidental overestimate means that the state is stuck with a law that will potentially disenfranchise 758,939 voters.
In a press release dubiously titled “Department of State and PennDOT Confirm Most Registered Voters Have Photo ID,” issued Tuesday, her own office illustrates that more than 180,000 of Philadelphia’s voters lack the proper ID to cast a ballot. More than 44 percent of Philadelphia is African-American.
Those pushing voter ID laws around the country have insisted their intentions are as nonpartisan as they are colorblind. But evidence to the contrary just keeps trickling out. Last week, Wisconsin’s Government Accountability Board scolded two lawmakers for receiving free legal services in connection to a voter ID lawsuit. Representatives Robin Vos and Bob Ziegelbauer said they were unaware the Republican National Committee was funding the legal work—which is a violation of the ethics of their office.
The Obama administration, meanwhile, is mounting a massive squad of lawyers to fight voter suppression this election season. With partisan organizations like True the Vote planning to train 1 million vigilante poll watchers who will do away with the imaginary problem of voter fraud, the administration hopes to train lawyers to protect against voter intimidation this fall.
Florida’s Next Target: Voter Registration Group
What happens when the country’s first black attorney general decides to defend voting rights? He’s held in contempt of Congress. At least that’s what House Democrat Nancy Pelosi is claiming about a House vote scheduled for Thursday on whether to hold Holder in contempt.
A House Committee last week decided to make a recommendation for a full vote for contempt, related to a “gun-walking” operation that began during the Bush era, when federal agents knowingly allowed arms dealers to purchase guns for Mexican drug cartels. After President Obama took office, Holder continued the program through 2011, but also began an investigation into what he has called the flawed and unacceptable gun-walking tactic.
Keep in mind that some 50,000 people have died as a result of the US-supported drug war in Mexico. But it wasn’t until a gun from the so-called Fast and Furious program was involved in the murder of a US border agent that the committee decided to go after the Obama administration. After Obama invoked executive privilege to protect Holder from the committee’s request for additional documents related to the program, a recommendation was made to vote to hold him in contempt in the full House.


