Civil Rights Advocates Give Election Reform Legislation Mixed Reviews
Feature Story by civilrights.org staff - 10/11/2002
Civil rights organizations weighed in this week with their opinions on the final conference agreement on the "Help America Vote Act" (H.R. 3295), legislation to overhaul the nation's electoral systems. Civil rights advocates agreed on the importance of election reform legislation that would ensure that all Americans who wished to exercise their right to vote could do so. Opinions were split, however, on whether the "Help America Vote Act" compromise would help meet that goal.The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR), which spearheaded a broad coalition for electoral reform, stated in a letter to Congress that H.R. 3295 was "an important step forward in improving election procedures and administration throughout the nation" in a number of respects, including its establishment of nationwide election standards, provisional balloting, statewide voter registration lists, and its funding to upgrade voting technology and improve accessibility for voters with disabilities. Citing these benefits, a number of civil rights organizations, including the AFL-CIO, NAACP, AARP and Common Cause, endorsed the final version of the bill and urged Congress to enact it.
However, LCCR ultimately declared that it would neither formally endorse nor oppose the final version of H.R. 3295 due to a litany of concerns expressed by other organizations.
For example, the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) charged that the legislation would disproportionately suppress voter registration and turnout among Latinos and roll back some civil rights laws. NCLR also expressed concern that funding for the implementation of reforms is not guaranteed. The National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) and others agreed, stating that there were several provisions of the legislation they believed would disenfranchise voters.
Of particular concern is a provision that would require first-time voters, if they registered by mail, to provide specific forms of identification such as a photo ID, bank statement, utility bill or any government document with a name and address. Advocates argued that this provision would have a discriminatory impact, especially on voters with disabilities, racial and ethnic minorities, students, the elderly, and the poor, who do not always have such forms of identification.
Groups also pointed to another provision that would disqualify any registration if the voter did not check off a box on the form declaring that he or she is a U.S. citizen. Because voters already affirm their citizenship when they sign the registration, advocates said that the new mandate was a mere technicality that would lead to the rejection of otherwise valid applications.
