Bullies at the Ballot Box - Demos
Bullies at the Ballot Box - Demos
Bullies at the Ballot Box - Demos
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
St<strong>at</strong>e laWS on ChallengIng regIStered VoterS<br />
BeFore eleCtIon day and Voter CagIng PraCtICeS<br />
In this section, we examine how <strong>the</strong> laws in ten<br />
st<strong>at</strong>es apply to challenges to voter registr<strong>at</strong>ion<br />
before Election Day, often on <strong>the</strong> basis of<br />
building lists of voters to challenge through<br />
caging, d<strong>at</strong>abase comparisons, or list-combing<br />
and comparisons to public records. 57 Specifically, voter<br />
caging is <strong>the</strong> practice of sending non-forwardable<br />
mail to registered voters and using any returned mail<br />
as <strong>the</strong> basis for building lists of voters to challenge.<br />
Challengers, often motiv<strong>at</strong>ed by a partisan interest in<br />
suppressing turnout of key constituencies, may rely<br />
on o<strong>the</strong>r dubious investig<strong>at</strong>ory methods and d<strong>at</strong>a th<strong>at</strong><br />
are wholly inadequ<strong>at</strong>e (and inapplicable) to voter<br />
eligibility. True <strong>the</strong> Vote, for example, is reported to<br />
“allow[] volunteers to scour voter registr<strong>at</strong>ion records<br />
for irregularities” by providing “a d<strong>at</strong>abase to compare<br />
voter rolls with o<strong>the</strong>r public records.” 58<br />
True <strong>the</strong> Vote’s software and vetting standards<br />
“draw[] on <strong>the</strong> power of Internet organizing and Tea<br />
Party networks.” 59 Participants look for inconsistencies<br />
between driver’s license d<strong>at</strong>abases and voter<br />
registr<strong>at</strong>ion d<strong>at</strong>abases or even jury lists. 60 Lists are<br />
compiled based on a number of reasons – “[i]f <strong>the</strong>y<br />
don’t like <strong>the</strong> way a person’s sign<strong>at</strong>ure varies from<br />
form to form, it is flagged as suspicious. If <strong>the</strong>y see<br />
th<strong>at</strong> too many voters are registered <strong>at</strong> an address, it is<br />
flagged.” 61 True <strong>the</strong> Vote’s n<strong>at</strong>ional research director<br />
explained th<strong>at</strong> “[w]hen you find 80 [registered] <strong>at</strong> an<br />
8 • <strong>Bullies</strong> <strong>at</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Ballot</strong> <strong>Box</strong> | September 2012<br />
one county election official said th<strong>at</strong> she is “not sure<br />
th<strong>at</strong> this group does understand st<strong>at</strong>e law . . . . Because<br />
a group comes out and says <strong>the</strong>se individuals (should be<br />
off <strong>the</strong> rolls) based on research from Facebook and<br />
linkedIn, th<strong>at</strong>’s just not an acceptable source.”<br />
empty lot, you push a button and all 80 people get<br />
challenged.” 62 One volunteer told reporters th<strong>at</strong> she<br />
has used <strong>the</strong> d<strong>at</strong>abase with her own st<strong>at</strong>e “election<br />
integrity” group, and has used social media and<br />
websites like whitepages.com and peoplefinders.com<br />
to research voters. 63 Such tactics prompted one county<br />
election official to say th<strong>at</strong> she is “not sure th<strong>at</strong> this<br />
group does understand st<strong>at</strong>e law . . . . Because a group<br />
comes out and says <strong>the</strong>se individuals (should be off <strong>the</strong><br />
rolls) based on research from Facebook and LinkedIn,<br />
th<strong>at</strong>’s just not an acceptable source.” 64<br />
As noted in <strong>the</strong> examples of described<br />
above, abusive caging and list-building practices can<br />
improperly disenfranchise eligible voters when<br />
<strong>the</strong>se lists are used to target voters for removal from<br />
<strong>the</strong> voting rolls. This section summarizes each st<strong>at</strong>e’s<br />
laws th<strong>at</strong> regul<strong>at</strong>e challenges to voters’ eligibility<br />
before Election Day. It points out areas th<strong>at</strong> may need<br />
clarific<strong>at</strong>ion or improvement in order to protect voters’<br />
rights and improve <strong>the</strong> fairness of <strong>the</strong> process.<br />
ColoraDo<br />
Colorado’s procedures for challenging registered<br />
voters include some of <strong>the</strong> most specific st<strong>at</strong>utory<br />
protections of <strong>the</strong> ten st<strong>at</strong>es we examined. Importantly,<br />
pre-Election Day challenges to voter registr<strong>at</strong>ion<br />
must be filed with <strong>the</strong> county clerk and recorder<br />
no l<strong>at</strong>er than sixty days before any election. 65 This