Respectfully submitted by Lawrence Rafferty (rafflaw)- Guest Blogger
With apologies to the writers of the famous song by the same title, I came across a small news item that didn’t make the big headlines this past week. Our friends in Georgia just don’t seem to get the idea that their citizen soldiers deserve the same right to vote that on military members enjoy. In the upcoming primary elections and general election cycle, Georgia has violated the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) by not providing military members the minimum amount of time between elections in order to assure that their absentee ballots arrive in time to actually be counted in the respective elections. At least the Justice Department thinks Georgia does not have the military on its mind!
“The Justice Department has filed suit in federal court against the state of Georgia, alleging that service members, their family members and overseas civilian voters won’t have time to vote by absentee ballot in run-off elections, if they are required. Georgia will hold a federal primary election for its delegation to the House of Representatives on July 31. If a run-off election is required because a candidate fails to receive a majority of votes, Georgia will hold it 21 days later on Aug. 21. By law, under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, states must transmit all validly requested ballots to UOCAVA voters at least 45 days before an election, unless a hardship exemption is obtained. According to the lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court in Atlanta, Georgia did not seek a hardship exemption for the Aug. 21 run-off election.” MarineCorps Times
It is amazing to me that in the year 2012 that a State Government would violate a Federal law that is designed to make sure that all of its citizens have an equal chance to vote in all of their statewide elections. Of course, the Georgia Secretary of State complains that the Feds are trying to enjoin or stop the allegedly discriminatory and anti-military actions during the actual elections cycle. “Responding to the lawsuit, Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp said: ‘ “The lawsuit seeks an immediate injunction while Georgia is literally in the middle of the 2012 primary. … The DOJ attempted to twist the state’s arm into agreeing to a consent decree, the terms of which would place unnecessary stresses on the elections administration process, before even filing the lawsuit.” ‘ MarineCorps Times
What the Georgia Secretary of State is not telling you is that the reason the Justice Department wanted a consent decree was that Georgia election law violated the UOCAVA legislation that was designed to protect members of the military from losing their right to vote. The question that should be asked is why would the State of Georgia not correct state legislation that impairs or prevents military members who are currently overseas from voting in their home state’s elections? Especially when that legislation is in violation of current Federal legislation to the contrary?
When our military members are deployed overseas. their hardships are great enough without putting up artificial barriers to their right to vote. Could these actions in Georgia be an attempt to prevent the military members and non-military Georgia citizens who are overseas from voting for political reasons? Why wouldn’t a Secretary of State want all of his/her deployed military and overseas citizens to have the ability to get their absentee ballots counted in every election? Why would the Secretary of State be surprised when the Justice Department comes calling when Georgia won’t reasonably attempt to follow a law designed only to allow all citizens the right to vote in every election?
I see the right to vote as a non-partisan issue that should concern all citizens, no matter what your political leanings are. In fact, the Heritage Foundation, a prominent Conservative think tank, held a military voting rights conference in July, 2011 to study whether the UOCAVA has been effective in reducing disenfranchisement of military voters. The Preamble to the Agenda for that conference stated the following purpose for the conference: “Overseas members of the military and their families are guaranteed the right to vote by the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act. However, the difficulties of obtaining ballots in remote and dangerous areas of the world and returning them in time have led to shockingly high rates of disenfranchisement. The Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act (MOVE Act) of 2009 required changes by 2010 intended to provide military voters greater opportunities to vote. Was the MOVE Act effective or are additional changes necessary to protect the franchise of service members and their families?” Heritage.org
I guess Georgia did not get the message that the laws preventing military members from getting their ballots and votes in on time needed to be changed by 2010. Are laws such as the Georgia ones mentioned above designed to intentionally prevent people from voting or is it just sheer governmental ignorance that causes a State to make it more difficult for some of its citizens to vote in all of its elections? Did Georgia do everything that they could have to reasonably attempt to honor the deployed military member’s right to vote?
Do these measures in Georgia have anything to do with the attempts in many states to require allegedly restrictive Voter ID steps to be taken by voters? As you can see, I have a lot of questions, but not a lot of answers. That’s why you, the reader are vitally important to this discussion. What are your answers and how do you see it? What questions have I not asked?
Additional reference: UOCAVA
OS,
Crowbar Hotel? Can you get a room there on Hotes.com?
I’ll end with this:
Before ACA it was you, your partner, your kids versus the insurance company, the medical providers, and big pharma.
After ACA, it is you and yours together with ACA against the others. You have ACA as a partner, as a leverage point, and a base to lobby from with your congressman. It’s not just you alone anymore. And it will get better.
That is a vast improvement as I see it.
How many here regard themselves as liberals. Most of those here on this particular thread re denial of franchise guarantees.
Now many follow Krugman? Obviously those who comment him have mostly a liberal bias.
So for myself, it is a pleasure to read the comments there following his OpEds.
One made an argument which I have not seen anywhere, not even here, thus worth mentioning:
ACA is not welfare, it is not a safety net.
It is a system which effects ALL citizens. It makes ALL a part of a system which provides guarantees. Such as that a cancer patient who had forgot to mention their childhood acne as a pre-existing condition can be denied in certain states treatment for their cancer by the insurance company. It also gives coverage guarantee to the working who lose their jobs, who want to change jobs, who want to start private businesses, etc, etc.
In short it is a system guaranteeing health care to the WHOLE NATION—excluding those already covered by Medicare, VA etc.
The liberals missed this point, and pointed only to the 30 million new persons covered, etc.
They missed that it helps ALL, both the current haves who have also a risk of denial by an insurance company under previous law, AND those who don’t have.
The liberal in me heartedly agrees.
OT again.
These grouped issues won’t diappear, not even after the election, 2014 and beyond. Maybe your grandchildren will be discussing it. Thus my return as this is one of the few active ones now.
Krugman states:
“But four justices dissented, and did so in extreme terms, proclaiming not just the much-disputed individual mandate but the whole act unconstitutional. Given prevailing legal opinion, it’s hard to see that
position as anything but naked partisanship.”
Just read a bit of Paul Krugman’s OpEd at the NYT. He generally praises ACA as it benefits the people at one-quarter the costs of the unfinanced tax cuts promised by Romney. BTW, ACA is fully financed he says, by taxes and cuts elsewhere. He has his caveats.
He says:
“It’s not perfect, by a long shot — it is, after all, originally a Republican plan, devised long ago as a way to forestall the obvious alternative of extending Medicare to cover everyone. As a result, it’s an awkward hybrid of public and private insurance that isn’t the way anyone would have designed a system from scratch.”
Could this be one of the reasons it was passed or did the Repubs renege on their own plan and were united in their partisan opposition?
Will Florida succeed from the union before or after the elecion? No odds given.
OS,
Any other updates from neighboring and likeminded states???
raff, since there has been no criminal prosecution of voter caging that I know of, they are becoming more blatant about it. Look at what is going on in Florida. They are disenfranchising thousands of voters, when an analysis of the list put out by the state shows only a fraction of one percent of those on the list might not be eligible to vote. Also, most of those on the list are known to be from largely Democratic precincts, especially those with large numbers of Hispanic citizens.
If a few dozen state and local voting officials got to spend a few years as guests at the Crowbar Hotel, maybe those still in the free world would think twice about what they are doing.
idealist707 1, June 30, 2012 at 3:26 pm
Dredd,
Goodness forbid that I play language police. But I think you will join me in calling for the discontinuence of the use of “minorities” as a code word for black americans.
====================================
I used the plural because the seething racial hatred in the south is not limited to a singularity, it in general applies to any non-white ethnicity.
Live in the south awhile and you will run across it neck deep.
Rafflaw,
Speaking of states, what is the state of residence of a service member, where he was posted overseas from or where he last lived as a civilian or born???
Simular questions applying to civilians living overseas??
Good blawg on law in practice with questions not loaded for obvious answers. Very fair that way.
Dredd,
Goodness forbid that I play language police. But I think you will join me in calling for the discontinuence of the use of “minorities” as a code word for black americans. First it was AA which recently got a thumbsdown. Then
it was “americans of color” being a no-no. Your use I cannot divine naturally.
The PC theme seems to be that all are Americans, and color or origin are of no importance. I support this idea and believe many would endorse it in general speech. Then if you want to add something of ethnic, religious, cultural, etc. interest irt an individual or family, then fine. do it and stand for it.
Maybe it’s even time to stop slinging trash between states and regions, but a nation was not built over a night—as Rome was not alleged to have been.
Georgia, I believe, is just following the general “states rights” and use the ALEC patterns and yell yahoo trend. It they can in Mississippi, then we can do them one better. “Gone with the Wind” and all that. It was better before the war, our war, they say.
Surround the state house with the guard under prez control, or units from the 101st.
OS,
You would think that if they are trying to deny people the right to vote that they would be less out in the open about it.
raff, if you can catch a Republican voting operative in a candid moment, they will tell you their ultimate goal is to cage votes until enclaves of known Republican supporters will be the only ones allowed to vote.
http://goo.gl/1F6TU
elaine hill,
open the “Leave a Reply” and uncheck the box or boxes at the bottom about receiving emails. You have to click the Leave a Reply box as if you were going to comment in order to see the email reply choice boxes just below. If that does not work, it may be another one of those WordPress glitches.
how do I unsubscribe from Jonathan Turley’s blog. They are filling up my email. I do not, repeat, do not want to receive anymore of them
bettykath,
Thanks for your comments.
I have been paying attention as you will note that I referred to these kind of actions in my article. However, it still amazes me that some State officials put partisan politics ahead of the right to vote. Especially when those actions might be preventing our deployed heroes from being able to cast a vote.
“It is amazing to me that in the year 2012 that a State Government would violate a Federal law that is designed to make sure that all of its citizens have an equal chance to vote in all of their statewide elections.”
———————
Good topic. Good questions. But I think you haven’t been paying attention.
http://www.nytimes.com/…/judge-opposes-restrictions-on-floridas-voter-gr...
Florida voter restrictions challenged – POLITICO.com
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/73453.html
Feb 29, 2012 – Florida will become the latest battleground in the national fight over voter IDs on Thursday, when a federal judge will hear a suit brought by Rock the Vote and other civic groups over new restrictions.
And the Justice Dept went after Florida in its attempt to scrub the voter registration rolls
We could probably benefit from having a microscope held over a number of other states that have a history of denying voters: NM, OH, TN for a start.
AY,
I had forgotten about Katherine Harris until you brought her up again! Thanks! I think! 🙂
That would be a first for Georgia … unless they have researched to determine that those from Georgia in the military who would be affected are minorities.
Raff,
Good piece….. I wonder if Katherine Harris is now in Georgia running the elections……. She did a bang up job in Florida for Bush…….