Leading Off
● California, Texas: On Super Tuesday, millions of voters in 14 states cast ballots in presidential and downballot primaries, but while voting ran smoothly in much of the country, the giant states of California and Texas saw glaring failures that led to hours-long lines and frustrated voters. Much of the blame belongs to well-intentioned but poorly executed efforts by Democratic election administrators to improve voting access, which in some critical cases wound up backfiring and causing long delays and wait times in metropolises such as Los Angeles and Houston.
Campaign Action
In California, Democrats control both the state government and key local governments such as Los Angeles County's. State Democrats have gone to great lengths to pass laws making it easier to vote, such as transitioning much of the state to same-day registration and universal voting by mail, with 15 of the state's 58 counties now voting almost entirely by mail.
However, Los Angeles County, which has the largest number of registered voters in the country, was unable to adopt universal mail voting under that same law due to feasibility concerns. The county instead has spent nearly $300 million on the country's first publicly owned voting machines, which were intended to improve accuracy, security, and accessibility, especially for people with disabilities. Those machines print human-readable paper ballots that count as the official record, which voters then deposit into a separate box in the machine for tabulation.
The county also switched from traditional local polling places to a fewer number of countywide "vote centers" where any county voter can cast a ballot. Under this system, electronic poll books are needed to check-in each registered voter when they show up to ensure they haven't already voted elsewhere (or whether they need to newly register), but many of these poll books malfunctioned. Voters also complained about problems with the machines themselves, from finding the design confusing to having the machines jam.
These equipment failures led to long lines in a number of voting centers. The Election Day crush was also exacerbated by the volatility of the Democratic presidential primary, which caused many voters to wait until the last minute to cast their ballots instead of vote early. And problems weren't just limited to Los Angeles, with other counties reporting difficulties connecting their poll books to the state's registration database.
These failures led Democratic Secretary of State Alex Padilla to call for Los Angeles County to mail ballots to all 5.5 million registered voters for November's general election. Local officials said that could be logistically difficult given their current resources and the time available, but state Sen. Ben Allen, who wrote the law to transition counties to vote-by-mail and vote centers, said he would swiftly introduce a bill to let Los Angeles County either open more vote centers or switch to universal mail voting.
In Texas, by contrast, Republicans are in charge of state government, and they've passed or maintained many voting restrictions. However, just like in California, officials in the counties Democrats govern took steps to improve voting access, and some of those measures resulted in unintended negative consequences.
Under state law, Texas counties can choose to adopt vote centers very similar to those used in California, prompting counties containing roughly three-fourths of all eligible voters to do so in the past few years, many with bipartisan support. However, while Texas allows early voting, it does not have anything like universal mail voting and requires an excuse to vote absentee by mail, meaning an even greater proportion of voters casts ballots on Election Day.
In places such as Harris County, which is home to 2.3 million voters and the city of Houston, Democratic County Clerk Diane Trautman had made switching to vote centers a key priority after she beat a GOP incumbent in 2018, and that system worked relatively well in 2019 when turnout was modest for local races. However, Republicans refused to cooperate with Democratic efforts to improve voting access. That required Harris County and a few others to hold separate primaries for Democrats and Republicans, with voting machines specifically allocated to only one party or the other.
Turnout on the Republican side, however, was always going to be lower than for Democrats in 2020, simply because the latter hosted a competitive presidential primary while the former did not. Republicans knew this would mean that GOP voters would face much shorter lines than Democrats.
However, Trautman nevertheless allocated an equal number of voting machines for each party. Democrats wound up outvoting Republicans two-to-one, leading to lines several hours long for Democrats in some heavily black or Latino locations even as Republican machines sat unused. Additionally, vote centers were disproportionately placed in whiter GOP-leaning areas, which Democrats claimed came about because the GOP refused to compromise on their locations.
While Republicans may have made it harder for Democrats to efficiently allocate voting resources on Election Day, Trautman issued a statement taking full responsibility for the problems because it was she who had campaigned so hard to replace traditional neighborhood polling places with countywide vote centers. Republicans in Texas have gone to great lengths to discriminate against Democrats and voters of color, but Tuesday's problems are a reminder that voters can similarly be harmed when Democrats fail to properly design or implement well-intended reforms.
In response to Tuesday's mess, Texas Democrats filed a lawsuit in federal court on Thursday seeking to overturn the GOP's repeal of the straight-ticket voting option, which took effect after 2018's elections. Restoring the option for November's elections would help shorten voting lines by making it significantly quicker for voters who want to vote a straight ticket to do so.
Two-thirds of voters used the straight-ticket option last year, with black and Latino voters disproportionately likely to use it. Democrats are arguing that the repeal intentionally discriminated against these voters and therefore violates the Constitution and Voting Rights Act.
Power Grabs
● Kentucky: Kentucky Republicans are pressing forward with another effort to strip Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear of his powers—moves they never so much as contemplated when Beshear's Republican predecessor was in office.
Most notably, the GOP would all but shred Beshear's ability to issue executive orders by giving legislative committees—which would feature Republican majorities—the power to reject them. The same bill would also delay new orders from taking effect by at least 35 days; currently, they go into effect immediately. In addition, any "administrative body" established by an executive order would be disbanded 90 days after the end of a governor's term.
This attack on the governor's authority comes after Beshear's issuance of a number of important executive orders, the two most significant of which ensured 95,000 Kentuckians kept their Medicaid coverage and restored the voting rights of roughly 152,000 citizens who have served out non-violent felony sentences (previous estimates were for 140,000 citizens). Beshear has been undeterred on this front, though, and recently launched a new website to help those with felony records learn whether they are eligible to regain their voting rights.
Meanwhile, another bill would require Beshear to obtain approval from the state Senate before appointing commissioners to the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission, which regulates one of the state's best-known industries, or the Kentucky Horse Park, a popular theme park owned by the state. That's similar to the GOP's first attempt to shrink Beshear's powers by effectively eliminating his control over the state's Department of Transportation. With Republicans in firm control of the legislature and only a simple majority needed to override any Beshear vetoes, the GOP can and almost certainly will keep finding new ways to undermine the results of last year's election.
Redistricting
● Arkansas, Nebraska: Redistricting reformers have filed initiatives in Arkansas and Nebraska that would set up independent redistricting commissions for congressional and legislative map-drawing in each state, with the goal of getting on the November ballot. If these measures pass, they would prevent Republicans from gerrymandering after 2020. We will bring you more details on both proposals in our next newsletter.
● Virginia: On Friday, Virginia's Democratic legislature moved forward with reforms to the state's redistricting process by approving a constitutional amendment that the Republican-led legislature had passed in 2019 before the GOP lost its narrow majorities in November.
Unusually, nearly all Democrats in the Senate supported the amendment, while all but a handful of Democrats in the House opposed it. Voters will now decide whether to adopt the new amendment this fall. If they do, it would take effect in time for congressional and legislative redistricting following the 2020 census.
As we've previously detailed, the constitutional amendment would create a bipartisan 16-member commission for congressional and legislative redistricting, with half the commissioners made up of legislators from each major party and half composed of citizens picked by retired judges. Maps would be subject to approval by the legislature and governor, but lawmakers could not draw their own.
The amendment turned out to be weaker than what reformers had proposed by dropping a number of criteria, including a ban on maps unduly favoring one party; a requirement to try to keep cities and counties whole; and a mandate to preserve communities of interest. As a result, nothing would prevent bipartisan gerrymandering to protect incumbents, though it would take bipartisan support for the commission to recommend a map to lawmakers, potentially limiting the chance for one-party distortion.
Democratic lawmakers thus passed statutory criteria legislation along party lines seeking to address some of these concerns by requiring the commission members to reflect Virginia's demographic and geographic diversity; banning maps that intentionally and unfairly favor a party or candidate; increasing transparency; and ending prison gerrymandering by counting incarcerated people for redistricting purposes at their last address instead of where they are imprisoned and can't even vote.
Democrats also passed a so-called "enabling" bill for the commission that includes the same nonpartisan criteria above, which the state Supreme Court must also follow if commissioners fail to pass a map. That last provision is critical because Democrats are concerned that the state's highest court, which is dominated by conservatives, would draw maps that unfairly favor the Republican legislators who elevated them to the bench to begin with. (Virginia is one of the few states where legislators choose judges.)
The amendment was approved after Democrats tried and failed to pass an alternative amendment that they argued was superior. While that substitute would have enshrined the nonpartisan criteria into the state constitution, it would have effectively let the legislative majority appoint a majority of commissioners, leaving little doubt that it would have ultimately let Democrats pass maps without Republican support. Furthermore, it wouldn't have taken effect in time for the next round of redistricting in 2021, prompting a handful of House Democrats to side with Republicans to block it.
Given the bipartisan support for the redistricting reform amendment, it is likely to pass at the ballot box in November. If it does, the new system will prevent Democrats from gerrymandering and should ensure maps that are relatively fair both on a partisan basis and to racial minorities. However, the strengthened criteria are only statutory, and unless they're added to the constitution in the future, Republicans could repeal them if they regain full power.
Felony Disenfranchisement
● Florida: The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has declined to stay its recent ruling in favor of a group of plaintiffs seeking to invalidate a modern-day poll tax passed last year by Florida Republicans. In its decision last month, the appeals court upheld an injunction by a district court judge that had barred enforcement of the law, which would have required citizens who've completed felony sentences to pay all fines and fees before regaining their right to vote. Republicans are continuing to appeal.
● Iowa: Iowa Republicans and a handful of Democrats passed a bill in the state Senate that would ensure some citizens remain permanently barred from voting if the GOP-run legislature passes a future constitutional amendment to automatically restore voting rights to people who have completed their sentences for a felony conviction.
Currently, Iowa is the only state to impose a lifetime ban for any felony, which can only be lifted if the governor individually restores a citizen's voting rights. However, the state House almost unanimously passed a constitutional amendment in 2019 to automatically restore voting rights upon completion of any prison, parole, or probation sentence for a felony conviction. That amendment died, however, after Republican senators balked and demanded the payment requirement in exchange for their support.
Their newest bill would maintain this lifetime disenfranchisement thanks to a measure that is effectively a poll tax: requiring the payment of any court-ordered restitution to victims, similar to a measure passed by Florida Republicans last year. The bill would also require people convicted of the most serious offenses such as murder to win the governor's consent to regain their voting rights. Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds has very rarely exercised that power even though she could issue a blanket executive order restoring voting rights to everyone who has served their sentences.
Reynolds has said she supports the restitution requirement. If state House Republicans pass the bill, lawmakers could in turn pass the constitutional amendment to set up the automatic restoration process for those who would still be eligible. It would have to pass the legislature again after 2020 before voters could approve it in a 2022 referendum.
Voter Suppression
● Kentucky: Republicans in Kentucky's state House have passed a new voter ID bill, but it's unclear what the final product will look like. That's because Senate Republicans are refusing to adopt the House's version, which made concessions to Democrats and voting rights advocates who called for a looser requirement. The House version would accept more types of IDs than what the Senate passed; would let voters with a non-photo ID cast a regular ballot if they complete a form explaining why they lack a photo ID; and would let voters lacking ID entirely still vote if a poll worker signs a statement saying they know the voter.
● Missouri: As expected, Missouri's Republican-led state House has passed a new GOP-backed voter ID law that would be one of the most restrictive in the nation. Democratic attorney Marc Elias, who led the successful fight that saw the Missouri Supreme Court strike down the state's previous voter ID law, previously promised renewed litigation if this latest measure becomes law.
Voter Registration and Voting Access
● Illinois: Voting rights advocates have filed a federal lawsuit accusing Democratic Secretary of State Jesse White and the bipartisan state Board of Elections of failing to properly implement automatic voter registration after it was passed with bipartisan support in 2017. The plaintiffs argue that White and the board have refused to work with voting advocates to improve the system; that it inadequately accommodates non-English speakers; that it doesn't automatically update registrations when previously registered voters move; and that it isn't incorporating recently naturalized citizens.
White's office had faced criticism earlier this year after revealing that 545 people who indicated they weren't citizens had been registered to vote, which White blamed on a programming error that supposedly was fixed. Officials removed these individuals after they were discovered, though a handful cast votes.
Voting Age
● Colorado: A committee in Colorado's state House has advanced a bill along party lines that would give 16- and 17-year-olds the right to vote in elections for school boards, including both in local elections and for the state Board of Education.
Ballot Measures
● Ohio: Ohio's Ballot Board, which is responsible for deciding whether proposed ballot initiatives address only a single topic, ruled this week that a measure to expand voting rights must be divided into four separate parts, with all three Republican members backing the split and both Democrats opposing it. In response, the groups behind the drive have filed a lawsuit asking the state Supreme Court, which has a 5-2 GOP majority, to overturn the board's decision.
But if it stands, the move would require supporters to collect signatures for all four measures separately, though voters would be able to sign petitions for each. It would also shorten the amount of time activists have to gather signatures, since organizers would have to begin the process for gaining approval to start circulating petitions anew—something they've already done, in case their legal challenge fails.
Election Security
● Georgia: In a damning report laying bare Republican Gov. Brian Kemp's serious abuse of power, GOP state Attorney General Chris Carr's office announced there was no evidence that Democrats had hacked the state's voter registration system in the 2018 elections.
While serving as secretary of state, Kemp oversaw his own election for governor in 2018. Just days before the election, he leveled an incendiary charge that Democrats had improperly accessed the state's election infrastructure and placed his accusations prominently on the secretary of state's official website—where thousands of voters would see it when looking for voting information.
Of course, it was Kemp himself whose office had a history of election security failures, which included allegedly destroying evidence amid litigation regarding the exposure of six million sensitive voter records. Kemp appears to have made his hacking claim to misdirect blame for his incompetence, since he issued it just a day before ProPublica reported he had been warned about security vulnerabilities. Kemp's office subsequently worked to clandestinely fix some of the very security flaws that Kemp himself had refused to acknowledge even existed in the first place.
Kemp, who undertook many efforts to suppress black and Democratic voters through registration purges and other methods, had a clear-cut conflict of interest in overseeing his own election. There's no way, of course, to know whether his actions affected the outcome of the race. But by using his power and state resources to try to suppress voters in his own election, including his complete fabrication of serious charges of election interference against Democrats, Kemp's narrow victory over Democrat Stacey Abrams should be viewed as tainted and lacking the legitimacy of a free and fair election.
● West Virginia: Republican Secretary of State Mac Warner GOP made an unexpected announcement late last month that West Virginia would not implement a bipartisan-backed change to let military, overseas, and disabled voters vote online by smartphone in the upcoming May primary, citing security concerns. Instead, those voters can print out paper ballots they can mail in. It's unclear if this change will be made for the general election, too.
