Yesterday was the 52nd anniversary of the Voting Rights Act. And it was an important reminder that we still have work to do.
Two weeks ago, in a major win for democracy, the Suffolk Superior Court ruled that Massachusetts’s 20-day voter registration deadline is unconstitutional, noting that it arbitrarily and unnecessarily excludes thousands from the democratic process.
Unfortunately, not everyone is cheering the decision. Secretary of State Bill Galvin is planning to appeal the ruling, suggesting that it would create “chaos” for town and city clerks if people could register closer to an election, despite the fact that we are in the 21st century.
But it gets worse. While Galvin is parading around Massachusetts and getting good press for supposedly opposing the Trump agenda by (rightfully) refusing to provide voter information to the Trump-created “Election Integrity” Commission, he has also been peddling the same dangerous voter fraud myths that Trump and Republicans have been pushing on the national level and in states seeking to roll back voting rights.
We can’t allow that here. Massachusetts is the only state in New England without some form of Election Day Registration (EDR). It has worked for our neighbors, and it would work here. And it’s one of the most reliable ways to increase turnout.
Call/Email Secretary Galvin (617-727-9180; cis@sec.state.ma.us) now to demand that he drop his appeal, and that he stop spreading lies about Election Day Registration.
But there’s more that you can do to fight for voting rights.
We have the opportunity this session to pass two key bills that will strengthen our democracy:
H.2091/S.373 (Automatic Voter Registration) would bring our elections into the 21st century by automatically registering citizens who interact with government agencies (“opt-out” instead of “opt-in”).
H.2093/S.371 (Election Day Registration) would make sure no eligible citizen is prevented from voting on Election Day.
Massachusetts often lags behind our peers when it comes to voting rights, and these bills can help change that. Our democracy is strongest when everyone is able to participate.
Call your legislators now to demand that they co-sponsor these essential bills and lobby their colleagues and Leadership to do so as well.
Let’s not just play catch-up–let’s start serving as a model for other states.
I don’t see the word fraud at the link.
From this link? The one cited in the thread-starter?
How about this (emphasis mine):
I’m fine with election day registration for general elections. In fact I would prefer automatic or at least pursued by the government like the draft is. However, just to play devil’s advocate for a minute, if I were to move across the country next fall and my first night in my new house were November 1, 2018 is it really appropriate for me to vote for Governor of my new state the following Tuesday having not had a chance to get settled there, learn the issues, etc? That is a key reason I always assumed there was a bit of a lag, in addition to giving clerks a chance to settle the rolls before election day itself.
By rights it would be more a problem if you were *leaving* the next day than if you had just arrived. 😉
I’d be more comfortable leaving behind a legacy with my vote than voting in a new environment.
To answer Christopher’s question:
Yes.
In your hypothetical, you moved there. You’re going to wake up tomorrow, and the next day, and the next day in a state with a governor. That governor’s decisions will impact your life. Why on Earth shouldn’t you have a say?
Taken another way: lets say the state knows you’re going to move out on February 1 (you’ve signed a lease, taken a job, whatever). Should you not be allowed to vote because you’ll only be a resident for less than 1 month of the new governor’s four year term? How about if you’re in hospice, and unlikely to even survive to January?
I believe that the standard should be very, very simple: if, on the day of the election, you are 18+, a US citizen, a resident of the jurisdiction, and haven’t been prohibited from voting because you were found guilty of election fraud or a similar crime, you should have the franchise.
Can we not say “Democrats” when we actually mean … Bill Galvin?
Otherwise thx for the heads up.
And how about not saying “fraud myths” when Galvin never mentioned fraud?
Well, but he did.
Just as a convenience — for anything you’re reading in a web browser (chrome or firefox), hitting -f (control-“f”) will open a search window on the page your looking at.
I don’t have strong feelings one way or the other about Mr. Galvin. I do feel strongly that the notion of voter fraud IS a myth, and a scurrilous right-wing myth at that.
Whatever voter fraud issues are present — in Massachusetts or nationwide — have to do with fraudulent manipulation of voter rolls and similar centralized mechanisms that potentially allow a handful of people to disenfranchise thousands of voters (usually minorities).
THAT kind of voter fraud most certainly does happen, and is standard GOP practice.
The idea of large numbers of voters casting fraudulent votes is a right-wing canard.
Sorry, my mistake. I did a search too; I must have been in the wrong window or something.
But anyway, yes, I agree. In-person voter fraud is exceedingly rare.
In-person voter fraud is a right-wing canard. GOP voter suppression is reality.
My other question is what is the constitutional basis for the decision. Is it something in the state constitution because there is definitely nothing in the federal constitution prohibiting a deadline? I wish the Globe article you linked had quoted directly the clause which has been violated.