US Vets Fight for the Vote

Update: September 19, 11:18 a.m. The House passed its companion legislation, H.R.6625. Howard Gantman, Staff Director of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, said that negotiations on the Senate bill are "moving along" and he expects an agreement on the final language will be reached "in the next day or so." In addition to the VA, veterans groups, and voting rights organizations, both Democratic and Republican leadership are involved in the discussions with the hope that the final bill will receive expedited approval before Congress recesses.

---

When a prospective enlistee shows up at a US Armed Forces Recruitment Center, the recruiter asks whether the individual would like to register to vote. But for the veteran returning home – even one now residing at a VA facility so that their previous voter registration is no longer valid – the Department of Veterans Affairs is under no such obligation.

Many voting rights groups and advocates for veterans are trying to rectify this injustice by providing voter registration drives at VA facilities. Initially, the VA stood in the way – banning nonpartisan groups, election officials, and registration drives at its facilities. In July, Connecticut Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz was literally turned away at the door of a VA facility where she wanted to show veterans how to use new voting equipment.

In response, Senators Dianne Feinstein and John Kerry introduced the Veteran Voting Support Act (S. 3308) that would require the VA to allow nonpartisan voter registration drives and comply with any state's request that the VA itself offer voter registration at its facilities under the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA). Barack Obama is a cosponsor of the bill, John McCain isn't. It seems Senator McCainnot Support This is once again out of touch – even with the veterans to whom he claims devotion. The legislation is supported by groups across the nation, including: Veterans of Foreign Wars, American Legion, Disabled American Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of America, American Association of Retired Persons, Veterans for Common Sense, American Association of Persons with Disabilities, Brennan Center for Justice, Common Cause, Demos, League of Women Voters, and others. Companion legislation has already passed the House Administration Committee, where members recognized that the least Congress can do for the men and women who put their lives on the line for this nation is go an extra mile to support their right to vote – a basic tenet of our democracy.

On September 8, just days before a Senate hearing on the bill, the VA apparently reversed itself, issuing a directive to lift the ban on election officials and non-partisan groups assisting with voter registration. The reversal was good news, but it was also the third time in five months that the VA had revised its policy, and so when the rescheduled hearing rolled around on Monday, Senator Feinstein – Chairman of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration – was understandably skeptical of the VA's commitment to implementing a new approach.

"Candidly," Senator Feinstein told Paul Hutter, General Counsel of the VA, "the credibility of the VA is very low on this issue right now."

And it should be.

Lisa Danetz, Senior Counsel for Demos – a public policy and voting rights center leading a national effort to support registration at VA offices – testified that according to US Census data, 5.3 million veterans (or 23.2% of all veterans) were unregistered in 2006. Senator Feinstein noted that 50% of veterans ages 18-24 aren't registered to vote either. Paul Sullivan, Executive Director of Veterans for Common Sense, pointed out that the "VA has a notorious reputation for dragging their feet" and that it "can easily reverse course again and issue yet another policy banning voting assistance for veterans living in VA facilities."

Advocates who support the Veteran Voting Support Act say that the newly announced VA policy still comes up short in many ways. For starters, it only covers in-patients, not out-patients or veterans utilizing other VA services. It also only requires that voting registration information be posted on the wall (cluttered with god knows how many other fliers, forms, and bulletins) rather than VA personnel directly asking veterans if they want to register, as is the case when one signs up to enlist. This affirmative voter registration assistance is especially important for in-patients, many of whom are unaware that their previous voting registration is invalid when they move into a VA facility. The VA says 100,000 veterans are currently living in its facilities – most of those are elderly or somehow disabled. Finally, the ability of third parties to assist in voter registration is left to the discretion of local VA officials, with no timeline or explicit criteria, and many states have registration deadlines in less than three weeks.

In contrast, under S. 3308, once a state requests that the VA offer voter registration at its facilities the VA would be obligated to provide voter registration forms, assist with their completion, and submit the forms to the appropriate election officials. (Danetz testified that California, Connecticut, Arkansas, North Carolina, and Vermont have already made such requests – the VA turned down California and the other decisions are pending.) Non-partisan groups and election officials would be allowed to provide voter registration information to veterans as well. There would be an annual report to Congress from the Department of Veterans Affairs on progress related to this legislation.

Danetz testified, "Nonpartisan organizations have proved instrumental in increasing the numbers of Americans registered to vote, in particular through conducting voter registration outreach across the country. Significantly, elderly and disabled Americans – including veterans – may stand to benefit most from these… efforts because this group generally has the hardest time with mobility."

Among other objections to the bill, Hutter said the VA was concerned about maintaining control over its facilities, interference with veterans' care, and the VA being forced to serve as a "registration location for the entire eligible voting population" in any given state.

Senator Feinstein asked that the three witnesses meet with her to tweak the language of the legislation so that the concerns of the VA are allayed and uniformity at VA facilities is achieved. Addressing Hutter, she asked, "Would you be willing to sit down and work out this language which would allow some contact [with] veterans… to be able to register to vote? I mean, to me it's such a no-brainer, I don't understand…."

"Senator, we're doing that," Hutter replied. "And – "

"Then you won't mind if we codify it," the Senator said.

"No, I do not," Hutter said. He later added, "We want to make sure that you and your colleagues understand that we are not trying to limit access for veterans to vote."

"Mr. Hutter, the heat is on," Senator Feinstein replied. "There is substantial interest in this bill. Every veterans organization in America is supportive of it, virtually. I don't believe the Veterans Administration would have moved one iota had it not been for the publicity and support that this bill has had out there. As Mr. Sullivan said, you all have changed policy five times… What I am trying to establish – what Senator Kerry is trying to establish – is every veteran should have an opportunity to register to vote. And we should make that available."

After the hearing Danetz told me she was pleased. "From the tenor of the hearing, I am optimistic. You can never tell, of course, but the momentum seems to be going in our favor."

As of today, Senator Feinstein has indeed met with the witnesses in an attempt to come to a final agreement on the language of this bill. Negotiations are ongoing – but with the clock ticking on voter registration deadlines, they need to draw to a close fast.

This legislation isn't perfect. It still would require states to request that the VA offer voter registration services at its facilities rather than simply mandating it. In that sense, it's a continuation of our voting system which Representative Jesse Jackson Jr. described in The Nation as: "… built on the sand of states' rights and local control. We have fifty states, 3,141 counties and 7,800 different local election jurisdictions. All separate and unequal."

Veterans shouldn't have to rely on states opting-in in order to receive voter registration opportunities at facilities where they reside, heal, or obtain services. As Danetz said at the hearing, providing the opportunity to vote is consistent with the VA mission "to care for him who shall have borne the battle… by providing veterans the world-class benefits and services they have earned."

---

This article was co-authored by Greg Kaufmann, a freelance writer residing in his disenfranchised hometown of Washington, DC.

Comments (24)

1. Why that's....strange...

   why would the Bush VA and/or Republicans not want vets to vote, given "they all support John McCain and are mostly Republicans"?!??!?!?!?

   uh...right?

   Posted by Maskdelta at 09/18/2008 @ 3:26pm

2. Posted by Maskdelta at 09/18/2008 @ 3:26pm

   Because they are heroes Mask. And we should make sure to treat our heros like crap.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/18/2008 @ 3:47pm

3. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/18/2008 @ 3:47pm

   Well, I'd say Building 18 at Walter Reed was a good start for Bush on that.

   Posted by Maskdelta at 09/18/2008 @ 3:56pm

4. Because they are heroes Mask. And we should make sure to treat our heros like crap.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/18/2008 @ 3:47pm

   As if having to go to a VA Hospital isn't punishment enough.

   Posted by Benchrest at 09/18/2008 @ 3:59pm

5. Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/18/2008 @ 4:19pm

   Damn whiney veterans...always wanting it the easy way!

   Posted by Maskdelta at 09/18/2008 @ 4:28pm

6. lvliberty1 wrote Just more liberal nonsense. Voter registration should not be driven by more govt bureaucracy. This is where liberals show their utter arrogance. People are incapable of taking even a simple action like registering to vote unless more laws are passed and more taxpayer money is spent.

   Senator McCain is right in not taking a stand with Obama and the rest of the libs on this.

   It has nothing to do with not seeing veterans vote.

   Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/18/2008 @ 4:19pm | ==================

   We are not talking about regular people,we are talking about Veterans returning from war with great disabilities. Every veterans organization in America is supportive of it! It is everyone's right to register to vote and they have the right to vote.

   McCain is a dick for not supporting the Veterans on this issue.

   My guess is McCain doesn't support because he knows every Veteran will vote for Obama in November.

   McCain has turned his back on all those Veterans he fought with and all those who have fought in Iraq & Afghanistan!

   Posted by tinkabell at 09/18/2008 @ 5:43pm

7. Just more liberal nonsense. Voter registration should not be driven by more govt bureaucracy. This is where liberals show their utter arrogance. People are incapable of taking even a simple action like registering to vote unless more laws are passed and more taxpayer money is spent. Senator McCain is right in not taking a stand with Obama and the rest of the libs on this. It has nothing to do with not seeing veterans vote. Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/18/2008 @ 4:19pm

   Uhh. How is this taxpayer money? These are bipartisan voter registration groups. Not government run. All they need is the permission to open in the VA's. There is nothing in this about "spending tax payer money" or government bureaucracy.

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/18/2008 @ 5:58pm

8. It is in this we see the real conservative character, unwilling to give those they call heroes the most basic of citizens' rights. And yes that "give" is correct, because if they are standing in the way of it, then they clearly don't see such things as derived from the creator.

   Posted by onthehelm at 09/18/2008 @ 6:47pm

9. We don't need more govt programs. Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/18/2008 @ 7:07pm

   It's not more government programs. It is simply allowing groups that are already made by outside organizations into the VA facilities. There is no new program being made. Why don't you understand that?

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/18/2008 @ 7:48pm

10. Why don't you understand that?-----Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/18/2008 @ 7:48pm

    He doesn't WANT to understand it, CCC.

    It "looks bad" for the Bush Admin...ergo, he's got to come up with SOMETHING to attack it. It "seems" like a government program...even if it isn't...so he hates it.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/18/2008 @ 8:13pm

11. Absolute nonsense. I'm a Veteran and I don't see it that way at all.

    We don't need more govt programs.

    Posted by lvliberty1 -----

    curious, liberty, in what capacity did you serve? surprised a veteran wouldn't see the value of the VA, election officials, or nonpartisan groups helping vets register -- especially those who are disabled in-patients... and especially since many of those individuals wouldn't be aware that their previous registration was invalid.

    as for cost, I believe I read something from -- I think it was a NC secretary of state who said the cost and manpower was negligible.... but even if it WEREN'T negligible, it seems more than reasonable to offer this "benefit" -- easy voter registration -- to those who serve.

    Posted by italiano at 09/18/2008 @ 9:31pm

12. Because Congress never misses an opportunity once they legislate something to then find a way to fund it.-----Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/18/2008 @ 8:16pm

    Well, until that happens, you can't really complain....but will, because of what I said.

    It's bad for Bush...and it SEEMS like a government program.

    Never let facts get in the way of a good LVLIB rant!

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/18/2008 @ 9:57pm

13. Senator McCain is right in not taking a stand with Obama and the rest of the libs on this.

    It has nothing to do with not seeing veterans vote.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/18/2008 @ 4:19pm

    Liverlips, You are full of crap. If Bush pushed a campaign for all soldiers leaving the military to have damned bible given to them and counseled on Christian theology and conservative doctrine, you'd have a flippin orgasm in favor of such an act. But, God forbid that vets who actually are returning from combat should be registered to vote in the country people like you say that they fought for is a bad thing?!!

    Go screw youself old hypocritical jackass.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/19/2008 @ 07:40am

14. I'm a Veteran and I don't see it that way at all.

    We don't need more govt programs.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/18/2008 @ 7:07pm

    Big effing deal. I'm a veteran and I do! So I guess my our views null each other out. So, we don't need any more government programs? What about homeland defense? That's been oh sooooo successful. How much did it cost Liver?

    Beefing up security is all you care about because you are a serious coward afraid that the boogey man is coming for you. I have a bulletin for you. If someone really want to get you, they'll be able to do it. Ask JFK, MLK or Bobby Kennedy. Two of the three had pretty good security and were shot by the extremists from your party. God bless the GOP, AMEN.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/19/2008 @ 07:49am

15. So I guess my our views null each other out

    Woops, should be so I guess our views null each other out.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/19/2008 @ 07:50am

16. I support and use the VA services.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/18/2008 @ 11:05pm

    You use the VA services? You lazy loafer. Taking hand-outs or benefits from the VA when you could just work for the money yourself. All this because a few stary eyed dreamers like George Bailey fill their heads with a lot of nonsense.

    That's it, Cheney (and Liver) are Mr Potter!!

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/19/2008 @ 08:06am

17. I don't see what the problem is with this. This is a good idea. The right to vote is the right of every American especially including those who put their lives on the line protecting the rights of all Americans. It's not a government program. Just because one expects the government will take over the program doesn't mean it will. Why an American would be against the most important right all Americans citizens have is beyond me. The VA should've had no problem with this. It's not like the VA was going to transport the injured and/or bedridden soldiers to get registered. Even though it's not their job to provide voter registration, they shouldn't prevent outside, non-governmental groups from providing that service.

    Posted by k330k at 09/19/2008 @ 08:21am

18. We don't need more govt programs.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/18/2008 @ 7:07pm

    Keep flailing LL .... I guess its more reasonable that we make them wheel, limp, or drag themselves down to City Hall.

    Nice bunch you guys. Is this that "compassionate conservatism" we keep hearing about?

    Posted by leftofcenter at 09/19/2008 @ 09:12am

19. Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/19/2008 @ 08:06am

    LVLIB supports the VA and will use the rationale that since it's "defense" (or more technically "benefits for participating in defense") then it's Constitutional and he can support THAT kind of government program.

    But take that same rationale to something like Americorps...kids working in the inner cities or in rural areas, and getting college scholarships....

    and he'd balk at it and call it socialism.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 09:25am

20. Who said I'm against the VA? I support and use the VA services.

    Posted by lvliberty1

    I didn't say you said you were against the VA. I said it seems you are against the VA providing voter registration services. This bill would mandate that IF a state requests it, the VA would need to provide voter registration services to the veterans. You say you support and use their services, but you are against Congress saying this service should be part of the VA program.

    Posted by italiano at 09/19/2008 @ 10:29am

21. "Among other objections to the bill, Hutter said the VA was concerned about maintaining control over its facilities, interference with veterans' care, and the VA being forced to serve as a "registration location for the entire eligible voting population" in any given state."

    As I read the article, I was having trouble understanding what reason the VA could possibly give for their stance. Then I read the above paragraph. Oh. That I get. I can see someone (non-vet) who lives near a VA location walking in and asking... "Duh, I heard I can register here..." :/ Folks can be kinda stupid. However, it is being addressed, and it appears, sans gov't money. It does seem that the VA does less and less for vets by the administration, tho I really can't say this from a first hand point of view. But if reporting in The Nation is to be believed... And before a Vet goes postal on my missive and attacks my POV, "...You didn't serve, then shut up..." I have a plastic plate in my skull since age 14 and am ineligible for service. But I digress. At this point in my life, I am opposed to the way our military behaves and is made to behave. BUT I strongly feel the Gov't should do more than it does currently. In fact, it should go the extra mile. Err to the side of excess if anything. "Lost a leg, brain damage, thoughts of self harm? Let's see how MUCH we can do for you." Not how little! "Helped us gain access to that oil/copper/bananas? What do you need?" And while that last line seems sarcastic, it's not. We as a nation/the businesses who profit should do ALL we can for the Vets.

    Posted by Tht1Gy! at 09/19/2008 @ 5:47pm

22. Thanks for this report on vets and voting. Was it from The Nation or from a nightmare that I heard that one state Republican Party is going to use foreclosure lists to challenge voters at the polls? I guess it would be, "You're lying about your residence because it says here they foreclosed on you."

    Hope that was just the rumor mill -- or Jay Leno. Truly, if they steal three in a row, we're going to have to tell Ben Franklin that, sorry, we couldn't keep the Republic.

    Posted by RLawrence at 09/20/2008 @ 1:26pm

23. This is a great article. As a long time reader of TheNation, son of a professional soldier who served honorably in WWII and that that served all over the U.S. and Europe, and a potential pro. myself...until Vietnam where I served 16 months and decided to get the hell out since this war was not fighting for anyone's freedom that I could see I wish to say that voting is not only a privilege but a responsibility. If you are a citizen it is your responsibility to vote...especially if you are a member of the armed forces where it is understood that you will be expected to risk your life in defense of your country...note here that I do not say "sacrifice your life"...we are soldiers in a democracy and are not Japanese peasants (read kamikaze here) or Hessian mercenaries; we were and are American citizens not suicide bombers or mercenaries.

    I think that there is a movement to change our military to a force to promote home-grown fascism using the the Department of Homeland Security as their vehicle....preventing voter participation by our soldiers is part of their plan.

    Joseph

    Posted by outsideag at 09/20/2008 @ 6:38pm

24. You can smell the desperation of leftist and the Undemocrat party to find willing voters for their unqualified candidate Obamanation!... Posted by RedRiver_. at 09/20/2008 @ 9:28pm

    Red, please use your brain. We Dems want ALL CITIZENS to be able to vote their choice - legally - including you. I would think you would see it as unpatriotic to do anything but help Vets regain some sense of control by clearing the path for them, especially after what they and their families have sacrificed. Quit being so selfishly paranoid.

    Posted by CitizenShame at 09/22/2008 @ 4:41pm