I’ve worked as an official in three elections, including one presidential election. I’ve seen nothing but experienced, dedicated professionals doing their jobs, attending scrupulously to rules and details. Given my positive election experiences, I’m wondering why there’s an intensive effort this year in some states to make voting harder.
Could the recent spate of restrictive election laws be inspired by Donald Trump’s 2020 baseless claims of fraud? Possibly. But restrictive policies have proliferated ever since a 2013 Supreme Court decision removed the Voting Rights Act’s requirement for federal approval of new voting policies in districts with histories of discrimination, Shelby v. Holder.
Restrictive policies make it harder for eligible Americans to vote, especially low-income and minority voters.
According to the Brennan Center for Justice, which tracks the legislation, “Without this guardrail, voters lost a bulwark against discriminatory voting policies and states previously subject to preclearance were free to implement discriminatory restrictions on voting access without advance checks. Many states did exactly just that.”
Recent court decisions have continued to signal that these restrictions are, well, OK.
An unprecedented “wave” of restrictive election laws is under way.
At least 30 states have passed 78 restrictive voting laws since the 2020 election. Sixty-three of those are likely to become effective in 29 states this fall. They may include constraints on mail voting, with stricter ID requirements, reduced access to drop boxes, limits on who can help voters, and/or rules necessary for voters to stay on mail lists.
A North Carolina appellate court recently barred Duke and UNC-Chapel Hill students from using university-issued digital IDs for voting. (Their decision reversed a superior court’s opinion allowing the digital ID.)
The reversal aligns with the Republican argument that a digital ID is an “image of a photo ID, either as a photocopy or a photo on a mobile device,” found unacceptable in a 2023 N.C. Board of Elections memo.
North Carolina, a battleground state, has also added a photo ID requirement for absentee ballots. There’s also this, an unnecessary ballot measure: To amend the state constitution to clarify that only U.S. citizens can vote. Duh. That’s already the law. Making a big deal of adding it to the ballot, some suggest, advantages Republicans with voters who view immigration as a problem. Either way, it’s money and time wasted.
While some states are restricting voting rights, 156 new laws in 41 states have expanded voting access. They become effective this fall. Some expand vote-by-mail, ballot request and return windows, offer simplified signature verification requirements, or add more ballot return options. Some expand mail voting on tribal lands. States also expanded windows for in-person early voting, made registration easier, and restored voting rights to those returning from prison.
Now, another problem looms. In some states officials are threatening to withhold certification of results, the process whereby officials count ballots — in-person, mail-in, provisional, absentee. Local election officials certify the ballot count is accurate and complete; state officials do likewise, and, in presidential elections, it goes to Congress. In 2020 and 2022, “rogue” election officials have delayed certification, or refused to certify elections in Arizona, Georgia, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and other states.
However, North Carolina is equipped to handle such situations. During the 2022 midterm elections, two officials were ousted for their refusal to certify the results.
Betty Joyce Nash reported for the Greensboro News & Record and the Hendersonville Times-News before moving to Virginia where she worked as an economics writer for the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond. She co-edited Lock & Load: Armed Fiction, an anthology of literary short stories that probe Americans' complicated relationship to firearms. (University of New Mexico Press, 2017.)
Comentarios