Reclaim Democracy!

  • Home
  • Issues
    • The Right to Vote
      • U.S. Voting History
    • Corporate Personhood
    • Citizens United
    • Independent Business
    • All Topics
  • Resources
    • Presentations & Workshops
    • What You Can Do
    • Ed Board Meetings
    • Letters to the Editor
    • Op-eds
    • Talk Radio
  • Donate
  • About
  • Contact

A Leap Forward for Democracy Is Within Our Grasp

March 10, 2021 by Brittany Trushel

But Our Chance to Preempt Voter Suppression Could Expire at Any Moment

March 17, 2021

When the U.S. House of Representatives passed the For the People Act (H.R. 1 in the House, S. 1 in the Senate) on March 3, all but one Democrat voted in favor. Every Republican vote opposed it. 

Passing the voter protections of the For the People Act is the only path for democracy advocates to halt many of the 250-plus voter suppression bills stacked up in state capitols around the country. Republican vote suppressors have an easier task: they need only delay passage of S. 1 while more of those state bills become law — putting the onus on voting rights defenders to overturn laws in court, even if S. 1 passes. 

Each passing day also brings another chance for Senate control to flip back to Republicans. Many Democratic elders hail from states where, in the event of their death, a Republican governor would select their replacement or the seat would remain vacant until a special election is held. Such an event would almost certainly flip Senate control to Republicans by at least a 50-49 margin and doom strong voter protection. Democrats don’t have the luxury of moving methodically.

The urgency also comes from the potency of the For the People Act. If passed, S. 1 would be the greatest forward leap for democracy in generations. While voting rights are central to the bill, it also would secure election processes and take vital steps to neutralize the power of big money to determine our choices and control politicians. This includes a 6 to 1 match for small donor candidate contributions, giving candidates a huge incentive to increase time spent engaging normal people, rather than courting megadonors. 

Regarding the 2010 Citizens United v FEC ruling, the For the People Act says, “The Supreme Court’s misinterpretation of the Constitution to empower monied interests at the expense of the American people in elections has seriously eroded over 100 years of congressional action to promote fairness and protect elections from the toxic influence of money.” S. 1 backs up the words with tough controls over corporate electioneering. Corporate executives would be barred from using shareholders’ money for political spending without first demonstrating shareholder support — a step few corporations would attempt.

Filling hundreds of pages, the For the People Act is vast, largely due to its thoroughness. The Brennan Center for Justice created an excellent guide to the Act for those who want to dive deep. To help understand what the Act would do, we summarized the provisions and placed them in 3 groupings.

Preventing Disenfranchisement & Making Voting Easier
  • Establish two weeks of in-person early voting, including Sundays and during non-business hours;
  • Require states to create nonpartisan redistricting commissions (for US Congressional districts) and quantifiable criteria for district drawing (addresses district gerrymandering);
  • Establish automatic voter registration at an array of state agencies;
  • Enable voters to register on Election Day;
  • Enable online voter registration;
  • Provide prepaid postage for mail ballots, removing some financial hurdles to voting;
  • Ends prison gerrymandering by counting people as residents of where they last lived for apportioning representation, not where they’re incarcerated;
  • End felony disenfranchisement for those on parole, probation, or post-sentence;
  • Make it a crime to mislead voters with the intention of preventing them from voting;
  • Allow state colleges and universities to register voters, reducing efforts to impede student voting;
  • Allow 16 and 17-year olds to pre-register so they’ll be on voter rolls when they turn 18;
  • Ban states from purging eligible voters’ registration solely for infrequent voting;
Increasing Election Integrity
  • Allow voters to track their absentee mail ballots;
  • Grant funds to states to upgrade their election security infrastructure;
  • Require paper ballots filled by hand or machines that use them as official records and let voters verify their choices;
Reducing the Power of Money Over Candidates & Elections
  • Improve campaign finance disclosure rules;
  • Ban corporations from spending on campaigns unless they have a process to determine the political will of shareholders;
  • Require presidential candidates to disclose their tax returns;
  • Provide public financing for House campaigns by matching small donations at a 6:1 rate, so your $10 donation yields $70 for the candidate. This measure would incentivize candidates to seek out small donations from every constituent, rather than focusing on the wealthy. It also would lead to a more diverse candidate pool since access to wealthy donors would no longer be a prerequisite. The program would not use tax revenue — it will be funded by a surcharge on criminal and civil penalties paid by corporations to the federal government.

What the Act Leaves Undone
The For the People Act does not fully eliminate the need to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act and fix earlier damage to the Voting Rights Act by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Washington, D.C. Admission Act (HR. 51) is needed to grant full political rights to citizens in our capital and The Vote at Home Act advances vote-by-mail protections. Enacting the For the People Act also will not eliminate the need to drive an affirmative right to vote into our Constitution. Finally, the bill passed by the House needs cleanup to purge overly prescriptive language re election administration (e.g. micromanaging local election officials).

But the For the People Act would transform U.S. elections for the better. It will improve security, transparency, voter access, and protect citizens from the barrage of voter suppression bills encompassing dozens of distinct tactics across 43 state legislatures.

To be clear, there are some unnecessary, inappropriate and potentially unconstitutional provisions in HR. 1, as passed by the House. Making Election Day a holiday would undermine the importance of opening a two week window to spread out voting and diminish the opportunity to disrupt voters. And the service workers most challenged for time to vote don’t get a day off just because it’s a holiday. The bill also contains measures unrelated to voting (e.g. new ethics rules for the U.S. Supreme Court) that, regardless of merit, should be expunged to remove easy lines of attack from opponents. Election law expert Rick Hasen wrote (Wa. Post account required) the best good-faith critique of HR. 1 we’ve seen. Jessica Huseman critiques the timeline for demands thrust upon election administrators in the bill (as passed by the House) and the Brennan Center published a thorough response to these critiques..

While expanding democracy should be a non-partisan cause, Republican Senators also have signaled their opposition. So passage of S. 1 will depend on the 48 Democratic and two Independent Senators valuing our voting rights enough to reform (or eliminate) the filibuster and force a vote on the merits of the bill. Democracy advocates received a boost on March 16 when President Biden announced his support for filibuster reform after months of proclaiming Republicans were capable of good faith negotiation.

Failing to pass the For the People Act will enable a wave of state-level voter suppression laws that could lock Republicans into control of (at least) the House of Representatives and many state legislatures for years to come. Let’s contact our Senators’ offices to urge reforming the filibuster and demand that S. 1  receive a hearing and vote. Along with direct communication to Senators, sending a letter to the editor of your local paper and calling in to talk radio shows are key ways to influence your Senators.

The writer, Jeff Milchen, founded Reclaim Democracy! Twitter: @JMilchen. Brittany Trushel provided research and formatting.
Thanks to Stephen Wolf’s Voting Rights Roundup newsletter from Daily Kos for helping follow and understand state and federal voting rights bills. To fully grasp the scope of voter suppression tactics in play, see 46 Ways to Disenfranchise and Suppress Voters.

Pass For the People Act., HR1

Related Reclaim Democracy Resources

  • 46 Ways to Disenfranchise and Suppress Voters
  • Why We Need an Affirmative Right to Vote
  • Landmarks in Voting History & Law
  • Key Elements of a Right to Vote Amendment

Filed Under: Activism, Civil Rights and Liberties, Transforming Politics, Voting Rights

46 Ways to Disenfranchise or Suppress Voters

January 19, 2021 by Brittany Trushel

(& How to Prevent Most of Them)

By Jeff Milchen, with Brittany Trushel. Last updated March 17, 2021

U.S. elections overseers called the 2020 election, “The most secure in history,” and state election officials of both major parties agreed. Yet inclusiveness is no less important than security, and attacks on voting rights are escalating. During just the first seven weeks of 2021, legislators across 43 states proposed more than 250 bills to restrict voting.

Our collection below summarizes the most impactful tactics and structures that impede voting or deny equal voting power, with examples. We also provide an overview of legislative and constitutional solutions to voter suppression. Most urgent among these, the “For the People Act” would preclude nearly every tactic described in #1-#43. See our FPA overview and action recommendations.

Reclaim Democracy! is a non-partisan organization, but fair and accurate reporting on voter suppression can be “balanced,” as the Republican Party is the force behind almost all examples cited here. While we focus on the most common or impactful tactics, this list is not comprehensive.

I. Active Vote Suppression and Disenfranchisement Methods

  1. Obstructing Citizen Initiatives Through Onerous Rules
  2. District Gerrymandering
  3. Prison Gerrymandering
  4. Judicial Gerrymandering
  5. Purging Voter Rolls
  6. Oppressive Requirements for Voter Registration
  7. Voter Pre-Registration
  8. Denying Registrations or Ballots
  9. Barring Ex-Convicts from Voting 
  10. Denying Citizenship to People Born in US Territories
  11. Restricting Access to Voter Registration Materials
  12. Burdensome Voter ID Requirements
  13. Veiled Poll Taxes and Requiring ID to Vote by Mail
  14. Burdensome Address Requirements
  15. Disinformation 
  16. Inadequate Early Voting Options
  17. Delaying Implementation of Voter Access Laws
  18. Forcing Citizens to Choose Between Safety or Voting
  19. Age Discrimination
  20. Requiring Witnesses or Notarization for Absentee Ballots
  21. Obstructing (or Banning) Ballot Drop-off
  22. Signature Challenges on Mail-in Ballots
  23. Partisan Scrutiny of Voter Registrations
  24. Insufficient Number of Polling Places
  25. Insufficient Voting Equipment
  26. Blocking Free Voter Shuttles
  27. Voter Intimidation
  28. Intimidating Poll Workers
  29. Making Citizens Doubt Our Votes Will Count
  30. Impeding Students from Voting
  31. Impeding GOTV Drives
  32. Banning Ballot Collection
  33. Denying Voters an Opportunity to Fix Errors
  34. Inadequate Ballot Security
  35. Sabotaging The US Postal Service
  36. Strip Voters’ Choice of Power When the Opposition Wins
  37. Challenge Electoral College Votes
  38. Allocate Electoral Votes by Congressional District
  39. The Duopoly Restricting Competition
  40. Manipulating the Census

II. Voter Suppression Tactics in State Bills, Not Yet Enacted

  1. Criminalizing Provision of Basic Supplies
  2. Discarding Citizens’ Votes for President
  3. Unreasonable Residency Requirements

III. Structural Barriers to Voting and Equal Representation

  1. Denying Representation to Citizens Living Outside of States
  2. The Electoral College
  3. The U.S. Senate

IV. Taking the Initiative to Affirm Our Democratic Rights


I. Active Vote Suppression and Disenfranchisement

1. Obstructing Citizen Initiatives Through Onerous Rules
A 2021 Missouri bill would require signatures from 15% of voters in every congressional district in the state just to place a question for the ballot. Despite the lower percentage, an Idaho proposal requiring endorsement from 6% of voters in every state district would be a burdensome and costly feat. Extreme signature-gathering requirements would transform the initiative process by requiring huge bankrolls to succeed.

In Utah, a dark-money group is behind a bill to obstruct initiatives with more subtle, but no less burdensome tactics. In another approach, Missouri, Arizona, and other states would require any new initiative be approved by a supermajority to win. In each case above, Republicans propose to obstruct citizen-lawmaking after their constituents passed progressive ballot initiatives.

2. District Gerrymandering
The dominant political party, rather than a public-serving body, draws voting districts in most states, and typically aim to favor the party in power and minimize competition. In 2012, Pennsylvanians cast 83,000 more votes for Democratic than Republican U.S. House candidates, but Rs won 13 of 18 seats.

Without reform, the situation is likely to worsen following the 2020 census after the SCOTUS ruled that federal courts lack authority to ensure fair voting districts. Republicans control redistricting in 20 states and Democrats in seven (the rests have independent commissions or divided government). Learn more.

2020 state election results as an effect of gerrymandering.
Gerrymandering delivers minority rule in the WI state assembly

3. Prison Gerrymandering
Inmates often are counted for apportioning legislative seats where they are imprisoned, yet they cannot vote. This shifts political power to (mostly) rural areas like Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan’s meandering district — crafted to include three prisons housing more than 12,000 inmates!

4. Judicial Gerrymandering 
Pennsylvania Republicans are pushing a state constitutional amendment to radically alter its appeals courts by electing judges based on newly created districts (drawn by Republicans) instead of statewide elections. The state’s appellate judges have protected voters from anti-democratic schemes in the past, as the state’s Supreme Court rejected a Republican lawsuit to overthrow the 2020 presidential election results. Thankfully, the proposed plan would have to be ratified by Pennsylvania voters. 

5. Purging Voter Rolls
Wisconsin, Florida, Georgia and Ohio are among many states aggressively purging voter rolls — using lack of voting as a trigger to rescind registration. After not voting for as few as two elections, a bulk mailing may be sent instructing a voter to verify their registration or be removed from the rolls. These notices may appear to be junk mail. Ohio’s data demonstrates a high percentage of active voters simply sit out some elections. Learn more. Bills to accelerate voter purges were pending in AL, AZ, CA, HI, MI, MO, MS, NH, NJ, PA, SC, SD, TX, UT as of March 15.

6. Oppressive Requirements for Voter Registration
Alabama, Georgia, and Kansas all have required birth certificates or passports to register, leaving tens of thousands of citizens unable to vote because they lack the documentation. This can be costly and time-consuming (and for some, nearly impossible) to acquire. Learn more.

7. Voter Pre-Registration
In Oneida County, New York, 2,400 people submitted timely registration forms in 2020, but were never registered. The district’s congressional race went undecided for three months and the margin was just over 100 votes. We support automatic federal registration (as most democracies have), enabling citizens to register online and on Election Day. Learn more about automatic voting registration.

8. Denying Registrations or Ballots
In 2020, Republicans invalidated 100,000 absentee ballot requests on this technicality. More than 6,500 absentee ballot requests were denied in Ohio in 2018 due to signature issues. This powerful voter suppression tactic can impede significant portions of people.

9. Barring Ex-Convicts from Voting
Many states withhold the vote from people who’ve completed sentences for a felony, disenfranchising more than six million citizens. Such laws originated with racist intent and disenfranchise Black citizens at nearly four times the rate of others today.

In 2018, Florida voters overwhelmingly voted to restore voting rights to ex-felons. However, the Florida Supreme Court approved Gov. DeSantis’s (R) scheme to deny voters’ will and refuse to reinstate voting rights if any fines or fees are outstanding. Arkansas employs the same discriminatory scheme. Learn more.

10. Denying Citizenship to People Born in US Territories
The Department of Justice, under both Obama and Trump, fought to deny voting rights to American Samoans who legally are “nationals,” not citizens. The 10th Circuit Appeals Court heard arguments in Fitisemanu v. United States in Sep., 2020.

11. Restricting Access to Voter Registration Materials
In the heavily Latino and urban Harris County (Houston), Texas, the local U.S. Post Office branch refused to carry voter registration materials.

12. Burdensome Voter ID Requirements
Voter ID requirement vary widely among states, but people impersonating another voter is almost unheard of nationwide, since few people will risk years in prison for a lottery ticket’s chance of turning an election. Laws requiring some form of ID generates little opposition, but laws that require certain forms of state ID and reject others often aim to suppress students, those with low-income, and people of color — the groups least likely to have a drivers license or passport. About 11% of eligible voters lack official government ID. Efforts to enact strict new ID laws consistently promote false stories of voter impersonation.

13. Veiled Poll Taxes and Requiring ID to Vote by Mail
Among the provisions in Georgia’s bundle of new regulations enacted in March, 2021 is one requiring voters to submit photocopies of approved government ID or include their state ID number (both to request a mail ballot, and to submit it). Indiana is advancing a similar bill (SB 353) rife with opportunities for confusion. The rare instances of people returning the ballot of a family member or roommate are unlikely to be prevented by the law, but for people who lack easy access to a printer, it’s effectively a poll tax — banned by our Constitution. In addition, requiring user-paid postage adds another obstacle for many people. Currently, 12 states provide postage-paid ballots.

14. Burdensome Address Requirements
The SCOTUS has enabled voter suppression simply for living where conventional postal addresses are not used, which is especially common on Native American reservations. In Utah, for example, 75% of San Juan County (Navajo Nation) residents lack street addresses that conform to state ID rules. A federal court in 2020 found only 18% of American Indian registered voters have home mail service. Learn more from reports by The Brennan Center and Pew.

15. Disinformation
Vehicles for disinformation (meaning intentionally deceptive, not mistaken) include robocalls fliers, ads, and paid social media posts falsely reporting voting methods, hours, or locations, or attempting to intimidate potential voters. These tactics frequently target minority communities.

While judges may block such schemes, the damage often is done before action can be taken and cannot be remedied. Local elections agencies also have circulated wrong information that could disenfranchise voters. Perpetrators are rarely prosecuted, though the DOJ announced an arrest in January of 2021.

16. Inadequate Early Voting Options
The 2020 pandemic led to broad expansion of early voting days, helping increase participation and reduce Election Day lines. Voters should have ample opportunity to vote early in-person, which eases hardship on many wage workers, increases participation, and enables time to correct errors. We urge readers to help permanently extend in-person voting in your state, and support a nationwide minimum of two weeks, including Saturdays.

17. Delaying Implementation of Voter Access Laws
Kansas passed a law in early 2019 enabling citizens to vote at any polling place in their county, which allows many to vote near their place of work, study, or home. The Republican Secretary of State has moved so slowly that the law may not take effect for nearly five years (i.e., August 2023).

18. Forcing Citizens to Choose Between Safety or Voting
Many states require an “excuse” affidavit to apply for mail-in voting — even during the pandemic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Missouri’s absentee voting remained notoriously difficult while the Governor dismissed objections to this voter suppression tactic. Bills to limit voting by mail are pending in AL, AZ, CO, GA, MN, MO, MS, MT, ND, OK, PA, SC, and WA as of March 15.

19. Age Discrimination
Despite our Constitution prohibiting any state from abridging the right to on account of age, multiple states have a dual standard for absentee voting, with those aged 65 and older (who skew Republican) enjoying easier access. Alaska mailed ballots directly to voters aged 65 and older, but not to others.

20. Requiring Witnesses or Notarization for Absentee Ballots
Misrepresenting a ballot is a felony offense, and forged signatures are rare. The burden of requiring witness signatures for absentee ballots is unjustifiable. Alaska, Alabama, and South Dakota require witnessed affidavits for absentee voting. Mississippi has the most Draconian absentee ballot process, requiring an official witness for both the absentee voting application and returned ballot. A pending (as of March 2021) bill in Arizona would require notarized ballots for absentee voting. Bills imposing new signature witness requirements were pending in AK, AZ, CA, MS, SC, and VA as of March 15.

21. Obstructing Ballot Drop-off
In 2020, after Republicans failed to ban drop-off boxes entirely, Texas Gov. Abbot decreed that counties cannot offer more than one drop box location. For context, the Democratic stronghold of Harris County (including Houston), is nearly 50% larger than Rhode Island. Multiple state bills have been introduced in 2021 to ban drop boxes entirely. Learn more about tactics used in 2020 and ballot drop-off laws from the Healthy Elections Project.

22. Signature Challenges on Mail-In Ballots 
Signatures deemed to be “mismatched” by election officials often are arbitrary, disproportionately void minority votes, but also disenfranchise seniors, women, and too many citizens of every age. Voting another’s ballot is a rarity and a felony, so signature checks should have a pro-inclusion bias. Yet that is not the case. An Ohio lawsuit maintained that 97% of voters rejected were likely to be wrongly disenfranchised. Bills imposing nw signature match requirements were pending in CT, PA and SC as of March 15.

23. Selective Partisan Scrutiny of Voter Registrations
The Trump Administration selectively checked signatures against voter registration files in heavily-Democratic localities like Broward County, Florida and Clark County, Nevada.

24. Insufficient Number of Polling Places
Among many examples, former Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp closed nearly 200 polling places in areas likely to favor his opponent in running for Governor (Stacey Abrams). Texas promptly closed 750 polling places the day after the SCOTUS gutted the Voting Rights Act. Creating long waits to vote in minority-heavy districts is a timeless suppression tactic.

25. Insufficient Voting Equipment
Providing too few machines per capita to urban precincts is a common tactic for generating burdensome lines. See Brennan Center report.

26. Blocking Free Voter Shuttles
Michigan banned companies from offering free or discounted rides to voting locations and barred advocacy groups from paying for such rides. A federal appeals court upheld the law. In Georgia, State Police are accused of stopping vehicles shuttling Black voters to polls, and elderly Black voters were ordered off a voting bus shuttle.

27. Voter Intimidation
There is a long, long history of Republican operatives attempting to intimidate voters in minority-heavy areas. Donald Trump’s incitements to join an “army” of poll watchers in 2020 sparked fear of trouble, since a legal agreement to halt intimidation tactics by the Republican Party expired in 2018. Thankfully, officials prepared well and 2020 problems were modest.

Governments have engaged in intimidation, too. Before being struck down in court, a New Hampshire law threatened penalties to people who came to vote without proof of address. Learn more.

28. Intimidating Poll Workers
The Trump Administration lost a lawsuit to force Clark County, NV, which includes Las Vegas, to make names of ballot workers public. Donald Trump’s false claims incited death threats against poll workers in Georgia and many other states.

29. Making Citizens Doubt Whether Our Votes Will Count
Countless false accusations of fraud left many voters without confidence their votes would count in 2020. In Arkansas, absentee ballots are disqualified for minor mistakes (e.g., discrepancies with address formats, signatures, birth dates) without alerting voters. In 2016, Arkansas rejected one in twenty absentee ballots, (the national average is one in 100).

30. Impeding Students from Voting
Intimidation, excessive ID requirements, and confusion surrounding the voting process all disenfranchise college students. Many states reject student ID for voting. Texas rejects photo ID from state-run universities for voting, but accepts gun licenses. A 2021 New Hampshire bill would disenfranchise any student living in a dorm. See more examples of laws targeting student voters.

31. Impeding GOTV Drives
In 2010 Texas Attorney General Greg Abbot (now Governor) abused his power to sabotage Houston Votes, a non-profit voter registration group. Until blocked in court, South Carolina required social security numbers on voter registration forms, crippling get-out-the-vote efforts by groups wary of violating privacy laws. In some cases, advocacy groups have invited backlash by repeatedly mailing pre-completed forms to unregistered voters.

32. Banning Ballot Collection
Montana and Arizona criminalized ballot collection prior to the 2020 elections. Both states have large populations living on Native American reservations where many citizens rely on ballot collection help because voting in-person voting or at a ballot drop-box can require a personal vehicle and hours of drive time. Courts struck down the MT and AZ laws, but attempts are ongoing in multiple states.

Ballot collection does carry some risk of fraud, but the best protection, enabling voters to track their ballot, does not hinder voting at all. Bills restricting ballot assistance were pending in AK, AZ, CT, KS, KY, MD, MN, NY, OK as of March 15). Note: “ballot harvesting” is a pejorative — collection is an accurate and neutral term.

33. Denying Voters an Opportunity to Fix Errors 
On mailed ballots, voters often sign in the wrong place, fail to properly use a security envelope, or make other procedural errors. When time allows, voters should be notified and given the chance fix the problem (called “curing”). Too often, voters ballots are discarded without their knowledge.

34. Inadequate Ballot Security
At least one claim made by Donald Trump in 2020 was based on a real incident, as a contractor in Pennsylvania apparently tossed nine ballots into a dumpster. Learn more about ballot security. Also, thirteen states lack any statutory requirement for voting machines to have a paper trail.

35. Sabotaging the U.S. Postal Service
In 2020, many USPS actions discouraged voting by mail, including raising rates charged to state and local governments, radically slowing delivery, and more. It could have been far worse.

36. Strip Voters’ Choice of Power When the Opposition Wins
After Democrats swept every statewide race in Wisconsin in 2018, Republicans — who held a legislative majority only through gerrymandering — stripped long-standing powers from the Governor before the transition. They also made voting more difficult in future elections. Kentucky Republicans are employing the same voter suppression tactic.

37. Challenge Electoral College Votes
If anyone believed attempts to subvert citizens’ votes would end with the Trump presidency, actions by Michigan and Arizona Republicans in early 2021 suggest otherwise. The latter would legalize the corruption Donald Trump encouraged in 2020 by enabling legislators to ignore voters entirely and give the state’s electoral votes to their preferred candidate.

38. Allocate Electoral Votes by Congressional District
Splitting a state’s electoral votes by district (as Maine and Nebraska do), rather than winner-take-all, would make most states’ electoral votes more democratic. But in heavily gerrymandered states where districts already are drawn to enable minority rule, it could disenfranchise a majority of voters. Such bills were introduced in January of 2012 in Arizona, Mississippi and Wisconsin.

39. The Duopoly Restricting Competition
Nothing in our Constitution mentions political parties, and the founders feared them. Yet two dominant parties now cooperate (primarily via state laws) to cripple competition and restrict voters’ choices. For all elections involving U.S. congressional seats, national standards should require non-partisan election officials, as well as neutral rules for ballot access and candidate debates (including presidential debates).

40. Manipulating the Census
The once-per-decade census determines allocation of Congressional seats. Electoral College votes, and federal funding to localities for many programs. Prior to the 2020 census, the Trump Administration launched a plan to exclude undocumented immigrants for the first time, seemingly for partisan purposes. President Biden rescinded this voter suppression plan upon taking office.

back to top

II. Voter Suppression Tactics in State Bills, Not Yet Enacted

41. Criminalizing Provision of Comfort
A dozen voter suppression bills were pending in Georgia as of March 9, 2021. Among them, HB 531 would ban distributing food and drink to people waiting in line to vote. It would be an arrestable offense.

42. Discarding Citizens’ Votes for President
An Arizona bill would amend the state constitution, enabling state lawmakers to override citizens’ votes and decide themselves which presidential candidate receives the state’s 11 electoral votes.

43. Unreasonable Residency Requirements
In North Dakota, an introduced bill would require a person to live in the state for at least one year before being allowed to vote  — potentially leaving someone without a vote anywhere for up to 103 weeks! It also would require someone to live in their precinct for 90 days prior to voting.

back to top

III. Structural Barriers to Voting and Equal Representation

44. Denying Representation to Citizens Living Outside of States
The U.S. denies voting Congressional representation to citizens living in Washington, D.C, or U.S. territories, disenfranchising about 700,000 citizens in Washington and 3.6 million in Puerto Rico and other island territories. Puerto Rico’s citizens outnumber those of 21 states, but territory residents are denied even a vote for their President. More than 98 percent of them are people of color.

45. The Electoral College
Along with discounting the votes of citizens in more populous states, voters outside of the few true “swing states” are ignored and effectively disenfranchised in every presidential election. The argument that the Electoral College could prevent a dangerous or unfit person from taking power — while credible in the 1700s — led to the opposite in 2016.

Moving to a pure popular vote requires Amending the Constitution, but Reclaim Democracy also supports the National Popular Vote alternative.

46. The U.S. Senate
The Senate’s bias against citizens living in populous states means a Californian has just 1/67th of a Wyoming resident’s representation in Senate. When combined with the current norm of Democrats allowing filibusters, just 41 Senators — potentially representing fewer than 10% of Americans — can wield veto power over a proposed bill or nominee. See Fixing the Senate for ideas on reform.

back to top

What About Real Instances of Voter Fraud?

The best evidence that U.S. elections are free of significant fraud comes from the folks working feverishly to prove it’s a serious problem: the right-wing Heritage Foundation. For years, their staff has combed the country for examples of fraud and maintains a database of “proven instances of election fraud.” They claim to have found more than 1300 cases… over two decades (many of which are not fraud, but human errors). In the 2020 general election alone, more than 158 million ballots were cast.

We looked up the findings for our home base of Montana and found exactly one case: a man submitted his ex-wife’s ballot after she’d moved from their home.

III. Taking the Initiative to Affirm Our Democratic Rights

First, our call to engage in constitutional reform is not a rejection of legislative approaches, but an essential partner to them. As of February 1, 2021, there are at least three pending voting rights bills in Congress deserving support HR4 (“The John Lewis Voting Rights Act”) focuses on restoring many protections the Supreme Court eviscerated with it’s 2013 Shelby v Holder ruling. HR1 / S1: a massive voting rights package that would banish many tactics and barriers detailed above (see our summary or a thorough indexed guide). Also, the Vote at Home Act would solidify mail-in voting options.

We hope to see rapid passage of many protections in these bills. However, we caution against relying solely on legislation. The Chief Justice and a majority of the SCOTUS have shown overt hostility to voters and a willingness to override overwhelming bipartisan votes by Congress. Thus, legislative fixes are an important step forward, not a long-term solution (see our Right to Vote Amendment page for a more detailed case).

The survival of fundamental rights must not depend on fleeting majorities within Congress or the Supreme Court. We advance democracy and secure our rights by driving them into the Constitution.

In 2001, we began work with a small network of pro-democracy groups toward amending the Constitution with an affirmative right to vote. While this approach was largely ignored for many years, we finally are seeing a true shift in awareness and broader embrace of the need to transform voting from a privilege to a right.

Learn more and take action! See Why We Need an Affirmative Right to Vote

Additional Reading

  • A Leap Forward for Democracy Is Within Our Grasp (“For the People Act” overview and action links)
  • To stay abreast of election law legislation, the Twitter feeds of @rickhasen, @marceelias @DKElections, @AriBerman, @VotebeatUS and their respective newsletters and blogs are recommended sources, along with many groups and reporters whose work is linked above.
  • Landmarks in Voting History & Law
  • Key Elements of a Right to Vote Amendment
  • See where your state ranks in ease/difficulty of voting
  • 2021 Report from the National Task Force on Election Crises and pre-election reports
  • Election in Peril: Procedural Risks to the 2020 Presidential Election
  • Considering History: The Fight for Native American Citizenship and Voting Rights
  • The Election Administration and Voting Survey: 2016 Comprehensive Report
  • 10 Popular Voter Fraud Stories Debunked (2020)
  • Trump’s Own “Voter Fraud Squad” Failed to Find Any Evidence (2018)
  • Biden nominates three voting rights advocates to key positions at DOJ

back to top

Filed Under: Activism, Civil Rights and Liberties, Transforming Politics

How to Arrange an Editorial Board Meeting

January 1, 2021 by Brittany Trushel

(and Why You Should)

Editorial Board Meeting

Editorial boards are commentaries that reflect the official position of a newspaper. Generally, the board assigns an editorial to be written by the board member with the most expertise in the topic. Other members offer input on the editorial, which is often published unsigned.

Why request a meeting with the editorial board?

Editorials boards in your local and regional newspapers can make a big impact on the community. Because editorials reach many people, it’s worth investing time to build a relationship with your local editors and informing them of your position, concerns, and expertise. 

You can request a meeting with an editorial board to introduce yourself or your organization or ask them to write about an issue. One value of arranging an editorial board meeting is to make them aware that you’re a credible and knowledgeable local resource for future coverage. A face-to-face meeting (even virtually) can positively define you, your local group, and your work.

When preparing for your meeting with an editorial board, practice these useful tips for a meaningful and productive meeting:

  • Role play the meeting. Ask your group to brainstorm the toughest questions you may be asked on the subject, and challenge the meeting participants until they can provide concise, confident, and accurate answers. In advance, identify who will tackle which topics.
  • Bring two or three people. Or more, if warranted. Bring a diverse group representing a range of stakeholders in your community. If bringing someone who advertises with the paper and is also an expert in the area, DO NOT mention them as an advertiser.
  • Learn the players. Learn the board members, as well as what editorial position they may have taken about your issue. Be ready to build on or gently pivot from their beliefs; avoid clashing. The publisher, news editors, and relevant reporters may also participate. You can request a specific reporter’s coverage.
  • Learn the jargon. Familiarize yourself with the frequently used terms and the different types of newspaper pieces. Be ready to discuss the most-appropriate outlet for your message.
  • State exactly what you want. This may include a specific editorial (often a primary reason for the visit), asking for more coverage on issues, and let them know your expertise on the issues and why your perspective assists with thorough reporting.
  • Know your “hook.” Though a timely news hook is less critical than when submitting an opinion editorial of your own, it can help attract readers. Ask us for suggestions, if you have writer’s block.
  • Present your key points in 30 minutes. You’ll rarely have more than an hour, so present your key points early. You never know when an editor may be pulled away from the meeting.
  • Send key information before the meeting AND bring printed copies for all members. Most meetings will be virtual, but a background primer allows all attendees to focus more on key points. Limit backgrounders or fact sheets to 2-3 pages. Send sheets as a PDF.
  • Be credible. Do not overstate your case. Don’t try to answer questions that you can’t answer confidently. Admit you need time to check facts and get them an answer the same day.
  • Summarize your key points to close the meeting and make your request, again. Reiterate your key points; repeat your ask.
  • Send a thank you note, promptly. Thank all attendees for their time. Also use this opportunity to put in-writing any information that you lacked, including any fact-checked information.
  • If you don’t get the results you want, recognize that building long-term relationships is more important than a single story. You can always request the opportunity to submit an opinion piece (see our guide to op-ed writing and ask us for suggestions). If an factual error occurs, politely request a correction.
  • Make use of outside experts and “celebrities”. A prominent speaker, expert, or local “celebrity” can help you get in the door. If you have someone willing, take advantage of the opportunity and request a meeting. This tactic is especially useful for larger publications.

While this resource is geared toward newspaper editorial boards, you can also use these tips when meeting with a local TV or radio station. We also have a useful guide for calling into local talk radio shows.

Frequently Used Terms

Columnists usually are newspaper staff, writing to express their personal perspective.

Editorials are the collectively published opinions of the publication’s editors.

Letters to the editor (or LTEs) range from 100 – 300 words and are best for making a single point or responding to an article, op-ed, or editorial. Be sure to see our guide to writing effective LTEs.

Opinion editorials (or Op-eds) are commentaries from community members, freelance writers, or other columnists that usually range from 550-750 words. See our op-ed writing tips.

Other Tools for Activism

  • Writing Effective Letters to the Editor
  • Write Effective Op-eds & Get Them Published
  • Tips for Effective Calls to Talk Radio

Filed Under: Activism, Education & Critical Thinking Curriculum, Local Groups, Media Tagged With: community building, journalism, local outreach, newspaper

The Shrouded Weapon of Patriotic Correctness

July 21, 2020 by staff

August 22, 2020

Displaying his signature blend of victimhood and vitriol in a recent speech, President Trump accused political protesters of pushing a “cancel culture — driving people from their jobs, shaming dissenters, and demanding total submission from anyone who disagrees.” 

Put aside the hypocrisy of those words coming from a man who’s called for dozens of people to be fired for expressing opinions he dislikes. The more serious issue is the popular claim that “political correctness” presents a great threat to our freedom. In truth, its counterpart — patriotic correctness — suppresses dissent more widely and imposes greater consequences. 

Take the story of country music stars The Dixie Chicks. The three women band leaders never faced notable criticism of their Confederacy-friendly name. Yet the band downsized their name to The Chicks for their just-released album, Gaslighter, simply announcing, “we want to meet this moment.” 

Photo from Wikimedia Commons

Contrast that to 2003, when the band stepped out of line with country music political orthodoxy.

Days before the invasion of Iraq, vocalist Natalie Maines told a London audience, “We do not want this war, this violence, and we’re ashamed that the President [G.W. Bush] is from Texas.”

The backlash was immediate and savage as thousands of country music radio stations forbid DJs from playing The Chicks, slashing their record sales. Some groups staged events destroying recordings by The Chicks and band members received numerous death threats. 

The Chicks nearly vanished for years, but several multi-platinum albums granted them the wealth and power to resume their career years later. Their comeback single, “Not Ready to Make Nice,” defiantly rebuffed would-be suppressors. But less powerful country artists confirm the fear of getting “Dixie Chicked” influences everything from their lyrics to political engagement. That fear is just starting to ease nearly two decades later.

Performers identified as right-wing, like country star Toby Keith, may deter some invitations to perform with their stances, but face no such organized intimidation. 

Patriotically correct doctrines include: American exceptionalism is unquestionable, even though we trail other wealthy nations in many key measures. Our military spending is untouchable. Service members should receive preferential treatment without regard to personal merit. And patriotism should be expressed with chest thumping and flag waving, not dissent that aims to illuminate and correct our biggest flaws.

The NFL is among the institutions enforcing those rules. When President Trump attacked Colin Kaepernick for this kneeling protest against police killings of Black people, the NFL didn’t merely fail to defend an employee, it effectively halted his career. Silencing one of the league’s most visible stars made it unnecessary to tell any athletes just trying to make a team to “shut up and play.” Message received.

And what is the playing of our national anthem at sporting events other than institutionalized patriotic correctness?

Patriotic correctness is so omnipresent we rarely notice it and, like racial biases, practice it unconsciously. In an interview, liberal icon Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called Kaepernick’s protest “dumb and disrespectful,” giving the patriotism police a quote to weaponize. (She later apologized.)

Meanwhile, right-wingers play the victim when grifters like Milo Yiannopoulos lose speaking gigs for business reasons, failing to fulfill contractual promises or when college students organize to stop their fees from going to such self-promoting provocateurs.

As Alex Nowrasteh of the libertarian Cato Institute says, “every group has implicit rules against certain opinions, actions and language as well as enforcement mechanisms — and the patriotically correct are no exception. [But] they are near-uniformly unaware of how they are hewing to a code of speech and conduct similar to the PC lefties they claim to oppose.”

To be clear, political correctness can do harm to the free exchange of ideas, and too many Americans are ready to judge others for a careless utterance, but the patriotic correctness unleashed on The Chicks is both more pervasive and severe than any progressive pressure.

The Chicks blacklisting yielded only a setback — one they had the power to overcome by virtue of their previous success, but their persecution silenced many more vulnerable people. 

The most powerful suppression of speech is accomplished through implied threat and voluntary compliance, not punishment.

The writer, Jeff Milchen (@JMilchen), is a political consultant who founded Reclaim Democracy! and the American Independent Business Alliance.

Filed Under: Activism, Civil Rights and Liberties, Education & Critical Thinking Curriculum Tagged With: free speech, trump

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • …
  • 6
  • Next Page »

Search our website

Our Mission

Reclaim Democracy! works toward a more democratic republic, where citizens play an active role in shaping our communities, states, and nation. We believe a person’s influence should be based on the quality of their ideas, skills, and energy, and not based on wealth, race, gender, or orientation.

We believe every citizen should enjoy an affirmative right to vote and have their vote count equally.

Learn more about our work.

Subscribe to Newsletter







Donate to Our Work

We rely on individual gifts for more than 95% of our funding. Our hard-working volunteers make your gift go a long way. We're grateful for your help, and your donation is tax-deductible.

Join Us on Social Media

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Weekly Quote

“In every human Breast, God has implanted a Principle which we call Love of Freedom; it is impatient of Oppression, and pants for Deliverance”

— Phillis Wheatley,
letter to Rev. Occum, 1774

Copyright © 2021 · Reclaim Democracy!