As election day approaches, it appears to everyone is beginning to catch on to one of the biggest injustices of this cycle: the disenfranchisement of veterans. Since May when the VA issued their memo banning any voter registration drives at all VA facilities, the issue has received regular coverage on a number of blogs and "alternate" news outlets. The past few days however, have seen a flurry of activity on the topic from more mainstream outlets. The New York Times, Huffington Post(via Think Progress), and New Haven Register to name a few have all published editorials or Op-Ed pieces admonishing the action.
From the Register:
There is no reasonable explanation for the Department of Veterans Affairs' national ban on nonpartisan voter registration drives and voter education at its hospitals, nursing homes and homeless shelters.
The ban was imposed in May in what may be a last gasp of political partisanship by a Republican administration worried that any effort to increase the number of voters might help Democrats in November's election; or it may be the result of overly cautious bureaucrats who have ended up blocking veterans' access to the ballot.
The Secretary of State for Connecticut in an Op-Ed in the New York Times is also having trouble understanding the VA's decision:
Connecticut’s attorney general, Richard Blumenthal, and I wrote to Secretary[of Veteran Affairs] Peake in July to request that elections officials be let inside the department’s facilities to conduct voter education and registration. Our request was denied.
The department offers two reasons to justify its decision. First, it claims that voter registration drives are disruptive to the care of its patients. This is nonsense. Veterans can fill out a voter registration card in about 90 seconds.
Second, the department claims that its employees cannot help patients register to vote because the Hatch Act forbids federal workers from engaging in partisan political activities. But this interpretation of the Hatch Act is erroneous. Registering people to vote is not partisan activity.
If the department does not want to burden its staff, there are several national organizations with a long history of nonpartisan advocacy for veterans and their right to vote that are eager to help, as are elected officials like me.
John "I support the troops (but really only when its politically convenient)" McCain had this to say on the issue:
As I wrote in a previous post, it looks like Congress will have to intervene with legislation, but as Alternet points out:
Under the most optimistic scenario, even if the Congress passed legislation within a week of reconvening, which would be mid-September, the president would have two weeks to sign it into law. That timeline places the bill's potential adoption very close to the first week in October, when voter registration closes for the November election in 27 states. Moreover, at that time, state election officials would have little time to organize and implement voter registration drives, voting rights activists said.
The irony is that the one of the most politically partisan administrations in US History is claiming a need to remain politically neutral as its justification for its action. Actually I guess the real irony is that the very people who have sacrificed so much to ensure the stability and success of our democracy are having additional barriers thrown in their way to participate in that same political process.
[Cross Posted at VetVoice]