Leading Off
Campaign Action
● Maryland: Democrats recently rejected Republican Gov. Larry Hogan’s redistricting reform plan, but they used their state Senate majority to approve an alternative version that would essentially apply the ideas behind the National Popular Vote Compact to redistricting (see our Connecticut item below). Maryland is one of the few states that’s home to a Democratic-drawn gerrymander, but as we’ve previously detailed, that crazy-looking map shown above is surprisingly not that extreme of a partisan gerrymander compared to many Republican-drawn maps.
Maryland Democrats recognize that unilaterally passing reform without Republicans joining in will only make the existing national bias toward Republicans even worse. Consequently, the Democratic-supported bill would only create a redistricting commission if five other East Coast states do so, too. Those include New Jersey and New York, which already have redistricting commissions (though both commissions in New York and New Jersey allow officeholders to play a role and have serious flaws). Importantly, it also includes North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, whose maps were all Republican-drawn at the congressional level after 2010.
If Democrats can hold together in the state House, they could pass this bill over any potential Hogan veto. While Republican legislators in those nearby states are unlikely to agree to an interstate reform compact, this proposal is still far fairer at the national level than a piecemeal reform in just Maryland alone.
Electoral College
● Connecticut: State House Democrats passed a bill out of committee on a party-line vote to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, sending the measure to the full chamber. If the bill becomes law, Connecticut would assign its seven Electoral College votes to the national popular vote winner regardless of who wins the state, but only if enough states with a majority of electoral votes also agree to do so. Thus far, 10 states and Washington, D.C., have joined the compact, but their 165 electoral votes are well short of the 270 needed for it to take effect.
Thanks to Lt. Gov. Nancy Wyman’s ability to breaking ties in the evenly divided Senate in their favor, Democrats completely control state government in Connecticut. It’s consequently one of just three Democratic-run states, along with Delaware and Oregon, that hasn’t joined the compact yet, but if the party can hold together, that might soon change.
Voter Registration
● Oregon: Oregon’s Democratic-controlled state Senate approved a bill that would allow 16- and 17-year-olds to “pre-register” to vote, as long as they’ll turn 18 by the next election. Since Oregon automatically registers any eligible voter when they obtain a driver’s license unless they opt out, lowering the registration age to 16, an age when many people often first get a license, could mean more young people registering. With Democrats in power in the governor’s office and state House, this bill stands a good chance of becoming law.
Voter Suppression
● Arkansas: As expected, GOP Gov. Asa Hutchinson signed a new voter ID law that will require voters show some form of photo ID when they go to vote. Those who lack the appropriate ID can sign an affidavit swearing to their identity, allowing them to cast a provisional ballot, but the new provision could nonetheless cause voter confusion and intimidation.
This law comes after the state Supreme Court struck down the GOP’s 2013 voter ID bill in 2014, but Republicans believe this new measure will survive judicial review. Four of the court’s seven justices who heard the previous case are no longer on the bench, while the remaining three seemed open to a voter ID law if it were to pass the legislature with two-thirds supermajorities, which is precisely what happened. Just to be extra certain, Republican legislators previously voted to put a state constitutional amendment on voter ID up for a 2018 ballot referendum.
● Georgia: Georgia’s heavily Republican state legislature has passed an “exact match” voter registration law that would reject registration applications if literally any letter, character, or symbol in the information the voter provides does not perfectly match data from state and federal databases. If there’s a discrepancy, voters can cast a provisional ballot on condition of clearing up the differences shortly thereafter, while their original voter registration applications could be rejected after two years if they don’t.
While Republicans claim this measure is needed to fight fraud, these databases are infamously inaccurate, especially for black and Latino voters, whose names are more likely to contain symbols that trip up the databases. What makes this bill especially egregious is that Republican Secretary of State Brian Kemp just settled a lawsuit in February over using an exact-match system that led to the rejection of over 40,000 applications from predominantly black citizens ahead of the 2016 elections. With GOP Gov. Nathan Deal likely to sign this bill, a new lawsuit will be the only recourse for voting rights proponents.
● New Hampshire: Republican state senators passed a bill on a party-line vote that would tighten voter residency requirements, likely as part of a GOP ploy to make it harder for Democratic-leaning demographics such as college students to vote. The proposed change would require that voters show proof that they intend to live in the state long term, even though past court rulings make such restrictions legally dubious. With Republicans holding every lever of government in the Granite State, this bill will likely become law.
● Texas: The Republican-majority state Senate has passed a proposal over Democratic objections that would make permanent a court-ordered change to its voter ID law. After a federal court struck down the GOP’s strict voter ID provision in 2016, it required Republican legislators to allow voters to sign an affidavit attesting to their identity if they had a reasonable impediment to obtaining an ID. This new bill makes that requirement permanent, but it also imposes stricter penalties for those who submit false information.
Republicans dominate Texas politics and could easily pass this bill into law. If they do so, voting rights advocates contend that it could still result in voter confusion and intimidation. Meanwhile, litigation over the existing voter ID law remains ongoing over whether Republicans passed the original measure with an intent to discriminate against black and Latino voters, which could be grounds for throwing out the voter ID requirement entirely.
Ballot Measures
● Arizona: The Republicans who run Arizona’s state government recently passed a law to make it harder for progressives to put initiatives on the ballot by banning campaigns from paying petition circulators on a per-signature basis. Now the GOP’s pushing even further, with a new bill that would subject petitions to “strict compliance” instead of “substantial compliance” when they’re reviewed by election officials. What that change means is that signatures could get thrown out—and thus, an initiative knocked off the ballot—simply for mere clerical errors even if such small errors don’t obfuscate any signer’s intent.
Redistricting
● Virginia: On Friday, a state circuit court rejected a challenge to 11 of Virginia’s 140 state legislative districts that had argued that legislators violated the state constitution’s requirement that districts be “compact” during redistricting in 2011. This challenge attacked districts in both the Democratic-drawn state Senate and Republican-drawn state House, but given the much stronger degree of gerrymandering in the lower chamber, it’s possible that Democrats had much more to gain from a plaintiff victory.
It remains uncertain whether the plaintiffs, from the redistricting reform group OneVirginia2021, will appeal, but given the conservative lean of the state Supreme Court, their chances of success would be doubtful. A separate federal lawsuit targeting Republican racial gerrymandering in the state House is still in progress, however, after plaintiffs in that case scored a key victory before the United States Supreme Court in early March.
Felony Disenfranchisement
● Nebraska: Senators in Nebraska’s unicameral state legislature gave their initial approval to a bill that would remove the two-year waiting period for those with felony convictions to regain their voting rights following the completion of their sentences. The bill passed by 28 to eight in the Republican-dominated chamber, but unless it gains more support on final passage, that’s short of the 30 votes needed to override a potential veto from GOP Gov. Pete Ricketts, who has not yet indicated if he supports the measure.
Nebraska is one of just 12 states that currently restricts voting rights even after a person has completely served out a sentence. While it disenfranchises just one percent of its overall population, that number is a far higher six percent among the state’s small African-American population. This discrepancy, a vestige of the sordid history of felony disenfranchisement as a naked tool of white supremacy, is a key reason why reform proponents want to reduce the restrictions.
