Articles Tagged ‘Voters’ Rights’

Today the national ACLU released a video featuring Ruthell Frank, an 81 year-old woman living in Brokaw, Wisconsin, a tiny hamlet of just over 100 people. Ruthelle has been voting in elections since 1948 and serves on the village board. But since the Republican controlled Wisconsin legislature passed a law requiring a photo ID to vote earlier this year, Ruthelle may for the first time in over 60 years be unable to vote. Watch the video to learn why:

Politicians all over the United States are attempting to ram these Voter ID laws through the legislature ostensibly to prevent voter fraud. Of course investigation after investigation shows that there is no widespread voter fraud anywhere in the United States-and that includes New Mexico. Essentially, these vote-suppressing “Voter ID” laws are a solution in search of a problem.

Here in New Mexico we can be sure that legislators will once again attempt to foist the stale and debunked specter of fraud on us in an attempt to pass a Voter ID restriction in the upcoming 2012 legislative session. Secretary of State Dianna Duran’s well-publicized but opaque (and ultimately empty handed) fishing expedition through the voter rolls these past nine months is a clear preamble to the bill’s introduction. So when the session rolls around this coming January, we need to be prepared to ask our legislators why they want to make it harder for New Mexicans to vote?

As we saw in the video, Voter ID bills disenfranchise the elderly, the poor, the homeless, Native Americans and other minority groups who may not have valid photo IDs. Many people, like Ruthelle, may not even have access to or are unable to afford the documents that are needed to obtain a valid photo ID. Obtaining copies of birth certificates, passports or other documents required can be expensive-sometimes hundreds of dollars-and acts as a de facto poll tax on those who are least able to afford it. Voting is not a privilege, it is a constitutional right, and no eligible citizen should have to pay to vote.

Even though there is no evidence that photo IDs would be effective in preventing fraud, Voter ID apologists often use the line, “Even one instance of voter fraud is too many” to justify their crusade to impose roadblocks to the poll booth. But how many cases of voter disenfranchisement are too many? One? Two? Ten? Demographically, thousands of eligible New Mexicans stand to be disenfranchised by Voter ID legislation.

There are already hefty federal criminal penalties to deter people from committing voter fraud-and it works. There has never been a documented case of voter fraud in the state of New Mexico that would have been prevented by photo IDs. This coming January, let’s ask our representatives to focus their energy on coming up with real solutions to the real problems we face-not ginned up issues designed to disenfranchise large swaths of the electorate.

Micah McCoy, Communications Specialist

When I checked the news on last night before I went to bed my jaw dropped.

“Whoa!”

The 2011 voting results were in, and they spelled major victories for civil libertarians across the nation. Here are the highlights:

1) Mississippi “Personhood” Amendment defeated

On Tuesday Mississippi voters soundly rejected a amendment to the state constitution that would define a fertilized egg as a person with all the rights thereof. This is of course a fantastically absurd, really bad, terrible idea. For many reasons.

By this definition, certain forms of birth control could be considered murder. For instance, the Intrauterine Device (IUD) prevents pregnancy by keeping fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterine wall. So under the so-called “personhood” amendment should women with IUDs be charged as serial killers? What about fertility doctors who implant several fertilized eggs and then destroy all but the most viable?

Bottom line: anti-choice extremists have no business forcing their own religious world view on the rest of the population. Women have the right to make private reproductive heathcare choices in consultation with their doctor. That’s why Mississipians voted down this ballot measure by an overwhelming 16 point margin.

2) Russell Pierce, architect of SB 1070, recalled in Arizona

I’ll preface this with a reminder that the ACLU does not endorse or oppose political candidates. We do, however, weigh in on the policy issues they are responsible for. Russell Pearce, Senate Majority leader in Arizona, is best known as the architect of the unfair, discriminatory “Show me your papers” law passed in Arizona last year. This law would require law enforcement officials in Arizona to investigate the immigration status of anyone they “suspected” of being in the country without the proper documents. Essentially, the law is a mandate for state-sponsored racial profiling.

Yesterday, Arizona voters recalled Senator Pearce, replacing him with another Republican with a more mainstream stance on immigration issues. This recall move was widely seen as a referendum on last year’s unconstitutional immigration law.

Bottom line: state and local law enforcement should not be responsible for enforcing federal immigration law. It hurts our communities, destroys trust in law enforcement and leads to racial profiling of people who look or sound “foreign.” Arizona voters sent a strong message yesterday, repudiating anti-immigrant scapegoating.

3) Same day voter registration stays in Maine

In a bald-faced move to suppress certain groups of voters, the Maine Legislature passed a law in the last legislative session that eliminated election day voter registration. Their excuse for passing this vote-suppressing law will be familiar to New Mexicans–voter fraud! Rampant, pervasive voter fraud!

In Maine, like New Mexico, there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud.

Yesterday, Maine voters saw through the legislature’s political move and overwhelmingly rejected the new law with 59 percent of the vote.

Bottom line: Our leaders shouldn’t play politics with the foundation of our democracy, our elections system.

Bottom line-bottom line?

When civil libertarians organize together and stand up for the Constitution, there is no limit to what we can overcome–and ACLU members played a big role. The ACLU of Mississippi was part of the coalition that helped defeat the “personhood”amendment, the ACLU of Maine actively organized to overturn the voter-suppressing repeal of election day registration, and the ACLU of Arizona filed a lawsuit blocking key parts of the “Show me your papers law.”

So keep standing up for liberty with the ACLU. It’s hard work, but days like yesterday remind us what we’re fighting for.

ALBUQUERQUE, NM — Today, in a ruling handed down in the Second Judicial Court, Judge Nash ruled that the City of Albuquerque did not have to correct the city’s mal-apportioned city council districts before the October elections. However, as a consequence of this lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of New Mexico, the city has agreed to implement the reapportioned districts immediately instead of in 2013 as they had originally planned.

The following statement can be attributed to ACLU-NM Managing Attorney Laura Schauer Ives:

“We are pleased that, as a consequence of the ACLU of New Mexico’s lawsuit, the city will redistrict and implement those changes immediately. Our primary concern was that the citizens who live in districts one and five on Albuquerque’s West Side would be grossly underrepresented until 2013, when the city initially intended to implement the new districts. However, in its closing arguments, the city stated that “as soon as a redistricting plan is approved by the Mayor and is published for five days, it will go into effect.” This means that, although redistricting will not be completed in time for the October election, West Side residents will be equally represented a few months from now as required under the Constitution.”

The ACLU of New Mexico still maintains that redistricting could be completed before the October elections and the plaintiffs are currently considering an appeal to the judge’s ruling.

###

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

July 18, 2011

CONTACT: Micah McCoy, (505) 266-5915 x.1003 or mmccoy@aclu-nm.org

###

Current ABQ City Council Districts

ALBUQUERQUE, NM – Today, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of New Mexico filed a lawsuit in state district court, demanding that the City of Albuquerque reverse its decision to postpone redistricting until after the upcoming city council elections in October 2011. The City is constitutionally required to reapportion voting districts every 10 years following the release of federal census data to ensure equal representation among voters. 2010 census data shows that Albuquerque’s West Side experienced significant population growth, while other areas of the city remained stagnant or shrunk in population. By unlawfully postponing redistricting, the ACLU believes the Albuquerque City Council will dilute the voting power of residents on the West Side.

“At the heart of our democracy is the principle of ‘one person, one vote’,” said ACLU-NM Executive Director Peter Simonson. “When one city council district is grossly underrepresented, other areas of the city speak with a louder voice when it comes to making decisions about political leadership, bond proposals, and other important issues that affect us all. Failing to redistrict waters down the vote of citizens living in high-growth areas.”

The City of Albuquerque is divided into nine separate districts, each holding one seat on the city council. By law the boundaries of these districts must be drawn in such a way that each district is roughly equal in population. According to the latest census data, District 1 and District 5—both on the West Side—have 90,170 and 83,165 residents respectively. The remaining seven districts all have constituencies ranging in the low to mid-50,000 range.

For the past three decades following the release of new census data, the City of Albuquerque has moved swiftly to redistrict before the next city council election, ensuring that all areas of the city remained equally represented. This year, with full knowledge of the current major imbalance, the city chose to postpone redistricting until after the October 2011 city council election.

“The entire purpose of census data is to make sure that our government accurately represents who we are and the communities we live in,” said ACLU-NM cooperating attorney David Urias. “By ignoring the latest census data, the Albuquerque City Council devalues the votes of almost two-fifths of the city’s population.”

In its lawsuit on behalf of the more than 170,000 people currently living on the underrepresented West Side, the ACLU of New Mexico asks the court to prohibit the City Council of the City of Albuquerque from holding elections until they have completed redistricting as required under the Constitution.

Read a full copy of the complaint here: Redistricting Complaint

The attorneys on this case are ACLU-NM Managing Attorney Laura Schauer Ives, ACLU-NM Staff Attorney Alex Freedman Smith, ACLU-NM Co-Legal Director Matthew Garcia and ACLU-NM cooperating attorneys John Boyd and David Urias.

June 6, 2011

CONTACT: Micah McCoy, (505) 266-5915 or mmccoy@aclu-nm.org

###