Election Reforms to Drive Turnout
Friday, November 20, 2009
PERMALINK: http://www.progressivestates.org/node/24105
Election Reforms to Drive Turnout
As part of our Shared
Multi-State Agenda, the Progressive States Network is working with
legislators, advocates and leading experts to promote election
reforms that drive voter turnout in states across the country - just
in time for the coming 2010 and 2012 election years. Through
coordinated, strategic support, PSN and our allies will be working to
introduce and advance election reform policies that increase voter turnout
in as many states possible, providing model legislation, policy analysis,
messaging and more - all of which has been gathered and will be constantly
updated on our Shared Agenda Election
Reform webpage. Legislators and advocates can contact us
about participating and supporting Election Reform campaigns through our
website
or by emailing electio...@progressivestates.org.
Election reforms are a crucial tool in building increased support for
the broader progressive policy agenda. One of the largest
impediments to real progressive reform is that our election system often
excludes voters - non-white, less-educated, and less wealthy individuals -
who are the most supportive of progressive policy changes. Expanding
electoral participation to include a larger, more diverse set of voters
will increase support for the host of progressive reforms that are
supported by the substantial majority of the population whose voices are
not always heard at the ballot box. Working state by state to remove
barriers to voting and increase participation in the political process
will be a fundamental determinant of how successful progressives will be
in achieving the broader reforms we are working toward.
Summary of Election Reform Policies to Drive Turnout and Why They
Matter
Voters should be given every opportunity to participate in our
elections and be apart of a system that assures every voice is heard and
every vote is meaningful. As part of our Shared
Multi-State Agenda, the Progressive States Network is working to
promote three election
reforms that further these goals in states across the country:
National Popular Vote, Vote by Mail and National Voter Registration Act
Compliance. Each addresses a different layer of our electoral bureaucracy
- the presidential election process, the options for casting a ballot, and
the process of registering voters.
Why These Policies Matter: The last two election cycles
have seen progressives win impressive victories across the country.
However, these gains remain tenuous in many areas, and progressives must
be prepared for history to repeat itself and bring a challenging election
in 2010, especially at the state level. Adding to the urgency is the
fact that the results of the next election will determine who controls
redistricting in each state. Given this state of affairs, measures
that can help bolster turnout will be crucial to maintain the enthusiasm
voters demonstrated in 2008, which will likely be a prerequisite for
continued success nationally and in the states. Each of the three
reforms in our election agenda have been embraced by voters and elected
officials in several states.
- National Popular Vote (NPV): NPV is a state-based
movement to guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the
most popular votes in all 50 states (and the District of Columbia).
To achieve this result the plan uses two constitutional powers
explicitly granted to the states by our Founders - the power to
apportion Electoral College electors and the power to enter into
interstate compacts. Under the bill all the electoral votes from
the enacting states would be awarded, as a bloc, to the presidential
candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
The bill would take effect only when enacted by states possessing a
majority of the electoral votes - that is, enough electoral votes to
elect a President (270 of 538).
- Vote by Mail: Vote by mail is a system by which any
voter can choose to receive a mail-in ballot for an indefinite period of
time. In this way, it is an expansion of absentee voting by
allowing every voter to participate without having to give an "excuse,"
and allowing voters to permanently vote by mail. Importantly,
under this system, voters maintain a choice to vote at a polling place
on election day.
- National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) Compliance:
Under the federal "motor voter" law, states are required to
provide the opportunity to register, and assistance in doing so, at
departments of motor vehicles and public assistance agencies. Over
time, states have largely fallen out of compliance with this requirement
with respect to public assistance agencies. State legislators can
help reverse this trend by bringing oversight to bear on the NVRA
compliance practices of public assistance agencies, and where possible
passing legislation to mandate best practices for NVRA compliance.
Messaging Election Reforms to Drive Turnout
Election reforms are an essential aspect of achieving the fundamental
progressive goal of an inclusive society where every person is able to
participate in shaping their community into the place they want it to be.
Without broad and unhindered access to electoral participation,
minorities, the poor and other groups that lack political power in
proportion to their numbers will continue to be marginalized in our
society. For these reasons, progressives can speak strongly in favor
of voting reforms as a important tool in achieving a just society, and as
policies central to achieving the range of our shared goals including
health care reform, fair tax policy, and living wages for all workers.
National Popular Vote: NPV garners the support of
greater than two-thirds of voters in the 30+
states where it has been polled. The bill
has now passed in five states (Maryland, New Jersey,
Hawaii, Illinois and, most recently, Washington)
with a total of 61 electoral votes, almost a quarter of the total needed
for NPV to go into effect. Voters typically support NPV at about
75%, including healthy majorities of Republican voters. Polls
in individual states show consistent support as well, with voters
supporting it in a range from 68% to 81%. The following messages
help address some of the myths and misunderstandings about the
consequences of NPV:
- The Winner Should Win: Emphasize the primary reasons
why NPV has such broad support - because every vote should count
equally, and the candidate with the most votes should win the election.
These are the principles that we respect for our local, state and
congressional elections and they should hold for the Presidential
election as well.
- Making Every State a Battleground State Will Increase
Turnout: Average turnout in the 15 most competitive
Presidential states was 6%
higher than in the rest of the states for the 2008 general election,
so NPV will help
expand turnout.
- NPV is a Civil Rights Issue: Civil rights has drifted out of
the national dialogue as the battlegrounds have shifted away from states
with high percentages of minority voters. For example, just 21% of
African Americans and 18% of Latinos live
in the twelve closest battleground states from 2004. NPV assures
that all groups and their issues get
equal attention. This is why the NAACP and African-American
and Latino legislator organizations support
NPV.
- NPV Helps Small and Rural States: Despite myths
otherwise, by leveling the playing field, NPV forces candidates to
concentrate on all constituencies, states and populations, rather than
disproportionately spending time in a few larger winner-take-all
mega-states. In addition, because 12 of the 13 small states are
spectators, they actually constitute the most ignored groups of states.
- NPV Avoids Disputed Close Presidential Elections:
Because a very close result is more likely among a smaller group of
voters, the possibility of a Florida 2000 style electoral
meltdown is much less likely under NPV. Put another way, because
the margin of victory nationwide is much larger than it is in individual
states, NPV elections are less susceptible to problems than essentially
50 state races.
Vote by Mail: Vote by Mail is now an option in five
states (California, Colorado, Montana, Hawaii,
and New Jersey) and has been increasingly
popular with voters. California and Colorado have seen the
greatest usage with almost a third of California voters voting by mail in
November 2008, and an astounding 71% of Colorado voters doing so.
Key arguments in favor include:
- Vote by Mail Helps Increase Turnout: For many voters
going to the polling place on election day is difficult, either for work
or family reasons. Vote by Mail is the obvious, low-cost solution
for giving such voters the flexibility they need to participate in our
elections. Allowing voters the option to vote by mail for every
election gives them a flexible path to the ballot box, without which
they might not participate.
- Vote by Mail Gives Voters a Choice: In the 21st
century, we have the ability to give all voters a choice in how they
cast their ballots. There are many voters who can make it to the
polls, but who prefer to vote by mail either for convenience or because
they like having time to fill out their ballots in the comfort of their
home. However, under current practice in some states the mail
ballot option requires voters to have one of a few narrow reasons (an
"excuse") for not voting at the polls; and in all but five states,
voters must reapply for a mail ballot every election.
- Vote by Mail Reduces Election Day Chaos and Costs: Vote
by mail also helps make sure that no one is prevented from voting on
election day by long lines. Colorado residents reaped this benefit
in the last presidential election with a smooth election that contrasted
sharply with the previous election without vote by mail. In that
election some Denver voters waited in lines that lasted half a day or
more.
National Voter Registration Act Compliance: NVRA
compliance has been re-implemented by public assistance agencies in five
states (North Carolina, Michigan, Virginia,
Pennsylvania, and Missouri). The messages to expand
these successes include:
- NVRA Compliance Increases Registration: The
reward has been substantial, and in some cases dramatic, increases
in voter registrations obtained. Missouri has obtained the most
impressive turn-around, with a 2600% increase in registrations collected
from public assistance agencies after reforms were implemented.
- NVRA Compliance Assures Equal Opportunities to
Register: The National Voter Registration Act was enacted with
the understanding that opportunities to register to vote must be equally
available to all. But racial and socio-economic gaps in the
electorate will persist so long as public assistance agencies fail to
offer voter registration to their low-income clients. Such
individuals, who are less likely to own a motor vehicle, must have a
chance to register to vote at public assistance offices as others do at
departments of motor vehicles.
- NVRA Compliance Addresses Racial and Economic Disparities in
Registration: Recent U.S. Census data confirms the racial,
ethnic and class bias of the electorate: 73.5 percent of non-Hispanic
whites were registered to vote in 2008, as compared to 69.7 percent of
blacks, 59.4 percent of Latinos, and 55.9 percent of Asian
Americans. Only 65 percent of adult citizens in households making
less than $25,000 a year were registered to vote in 2008, as compared to
85 percent of those in households making $100,000. Effective voter
registration programs at public assistance agencies are powerful tools
for reducing these disparities and bringing more voices into the
democratic process.
Building Election Reform Campaigns
Progressive States Network is working with a range of allied
organizations so state leaders can tap resources from those groups to help
them in their legislative work. We will be working with those allies
to strengthen communication between legislators and organizational allies
across the states working on our priority election reforms, while
providing other technical support as needed during policy campaigns.
Allied national groups are working on every aspect of our
election reform agenda. Key organizations are listed below along
with critical resources for waging a campaign.
National Popular Vote:
Vote by Mail:
NVRA Compliance:
PSN Support in Your States
PSN has already begun working with legislators and advocates to provide
support for them as they introduce election reforms legislation around the
country. We'd like to work with many more!
Our policy staff are also available to answer questions and supply
information not on the website. Legislators and advocates can
contact us about supporting Election Reform campaigns through our website
or by emailing electio...@progressivestates.org.
As bills are introduced and sessions begin, PSN will provide ongoing
resources and updates on election reform legislation, as well as help
coordinate strategy and information sharing with our partners among
sponsors and advocates.
Research Roundup
New reports on Tax Inequality and the Fiscal Crisis in
the States
- Who
Pays? A Distributional Analysis of the Tax Systems in All 50 States
- Updating their critical analysis of inequality in state tax
systems across the country, this report by the Institute on Taxation
& Economic Policy (ITEP) highlights that the wealthiest
Americans are paying a smaller income than middle class residents in
almost every state. In fact, the average state tax rate on the
poorest 20 percent of families is 10.9 percent, which is more than
double the effective rate on the very wealthy. With this analysis
in mind, the clear import is that states can help close budget gaps by
having their wealthiest citizens just pay their fair share of taxes.
- Beyond
California: States in Fiscal Peril - This Pew Center on the
States report scores all fifty states on factors driving fiscal
crises, from high foreclosure rates and joblessness to legal obstacles
and tools to achieve balanced budgets, such as super-majority
requirements.
- Amazon's
Arguments Against Collecting Sales Taxes Do Not Withstand
Scrutiny - As states begin to collect sales taxes on online
retailers like Amazon, this report from the Center on Budget and
Policy Priorities documents that collecting such taxes are not
excessively burdensome, are not unfair to out-of-state retailers, and
leaving out-of-state retailers untaxed gives Amazon and other online
retailers an unfair competitive advantage over in-state retailers paying
the tax.
Workers
Losing Federal Unemployment Benefits in January 2010 Due to Expiration of
the ARRA - The National Employment Law Project
(NELP) released new numbers documenting that one million workers
(or over 30,000 a day) will lose their jobless benefits in January alone
if the federal extension programs are not reauthorized by the end of
December.
Tools for Greening State Economies
- Green Equity Toolkit: Advancing Race, Gender and Economic
Equity in the Green Economy - This policy toolkit from the
Applied Research Center provides strategies for labor and
community organizations advocating for economic opportunity for women
and people of color in the green economy, including examples of
successful local campaigns.
- Greening
Ohio Industry - With assistance, Ohio manufacturers could
substantially reduce their costs, save energy, and reduce carbon
emissions by investing in industrial efficiency, according to a report
released by Policy Matters Ohio. Along with greater
efficiency measures in production and upgrades in the energy grid, the
report notes that if the state made a $10.5 billion capital investment
in combined heat and power technology (CHP), it could produce $2.9
billion in energy savings annually and create over 40,000 jobs
Union
and District Partnerships to Expand Learning Time: Three Schools'
Experiences - This report by the Center for American Progress
examines the challenges and successes of implementing expanded
learning time in a traditional public school environment. It
highlights the role of teachers and teachers' unions in negotiating an
expanded schedule and reviews relevant literature on teacher time and
collective bargaining.
Parenting
with a Plan: How TANF Can Support Positive Parenting Relationships and
Foster Father Involvement - States and localities vary on how
well they are, or are not, providing tools to help low-income families
effectively parent while living apart. This Center for American
Progress report examines how federal TANF funding for its Access and
Visitation program could be improved to help states, make joint parenting
work, including greater support for services, legal service providers and
supporting community-based institutions to support families.
|
