Post by ErinB on May 30, 2004 14:28:23 GMT -5
More Florida Voting Fiascos Possible, Groups Warn
story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/oneworld/20040529/wl_oneworld/6573870821085818896
Sat May 29, 4:37 AM ET
Marty Logan, Inter Press Service (IPS)
MONTREAL, May 29 (IPS) - Some five-dozen residents of the U.S. state of Florida appeared in a hearing before Governor Jeb Bush in March to explain why they should be allowed to regain certain civil rights, including the right to vote.
But those citizens were berated about their personal debt to society or because they mistakenly voted in a previous election, says one eyewitness to the hearing.
Everything comes into play, from what medication a person is taking... it's truly shocking and gut-wrenching, says Courtenay Strickland of the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites) (ACLU).
Four times a year, Bush, brother of President George W. Bush (news - web sites), and three other members of the Board of Executive Clemency hold hearings in which some of the 600,000 Florida residents who have lost their civil rights after being convicted of a felony can apply to have them reinstated.
Florida is one of seven U.S. states where convicted felons who have served out their sentences have to apply to get their rights restored.
About one-half -- 28 -- of the Mar. 18 petitioners were successful, leaving roughly 35,000 more who have applied for restoration and are awaiting a reply or notice of a hearing, according to Strickland, director of the ACLU's Florida Voting Rights Project..
But according to early estimates, another 40,000 residents risk losing their voting privileges before November's presidential election. That is the number of former felons on a list distributed by Florida elections officials to supervisors who are responsible for compiling local voters' lists in the state's 67 counties.
Such an outcome would recall the disgraced 2000 election, which was finally decided, in favour of George W. Bush, by the U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites). Thousands of Florida residents -- disproportionately African-Americans, who traditionally back the opposition Democratic Party -- were wrongly stopped from voting in that election.
And it is only one of many worries for voting rights advocates heading into the final stretch before the November vote.
A newly formed coalition of groups said this week it is particularly worried about: the confusing voter registration and identification requirements; misused and malfunctioning voting machines; and inaccurate counting of ballots cast by voters who may be voting in the wrong local districts.
Led by the League of Women Voters and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the coalition wants states to provide complete lists of registered voters to each precinct so that local officials can deal with eligible voters who turn up in the wrong precinct.
It is also pressing for better training for volunteer poll workers on registration and identification rules and on how to use voting machines.
The coalition is not even delving into the controversial area of electronic, touch-screen voting, which one expert who evaluated systems used in 37 states likened to Swiss cheese.
Thanks to the Florida Election Reform Act of 2001 that state is now blocked from contracting out the compiling of the electoral rolls -- which resulted in a number of lawsuits against the state following the 2000 election that was finally decided by 537 votes -- and has developed a central database of voters.
But that does not mean the lists used for November's polls will be any more accurate, say Strickland and other voting rights advocates.
I really question whether, if this statute would have been in place in 2000, if more people would not have been erroneously removed.
Even if the list is more accurate this year, I think we run a real risk of having just as many folks potentially removed erroneously because of this whole new statutory process, she told IPS.
The new process includes using certified mail to warn potential purged voters that they are in danger of losing their rights.
One problem with that is, the records are very clear that African-American voters in particular do not respond to letters; they do not respond to newspaper ads (the next step in officially notifying residents at risk of losing their rights), says Barbara Arnwine, executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
African-Americans were nearly 10 times more likely to have their ballots rejected in the 2000 election in Florida, the Washington Post reported in 2001. A total of 19,000 residents were incorrectly listed as felons on that list, according to the ACLU and other groups.
What we believe is very important is that the state of Florida knows better and the (office) that sends out this letter is in violation of the rights of citizens, Arnwine added in an interview this week with National Public Radio (NPR).
Too many people are on (the new) list, according to Arnwine, arguing, for instance, that it does not take into account those felons who had their rights restored before 1984.
But one county supervisor says the fact that he has restored 553 former felons to his list illustrates that voting this year will be a fair process.
My personal intent is to look at every single opportunity that I have to keep a person on the voter registration rolls, says Buddy Johnson, supervisor of elections for Florida's Hillsborough County. We're very serious, very cautious and very deliberate in this determination, he told NPR.
Those people who arrive at the polls and see their name is not on the list can also vote using a provisional ballot. We take great pride in our process of keeping people on the rolls, Johnson added.
But Strickland says the law, not goodwill, now requires that local voting supervisors do their utmost to verify the information they receive from the new central database, which is collected from a number of other sources, but that the state's elections department has not made that clear.
The ACLU has written voting supervisors, asking them to independently verify the data, meaning that John A. Smith is not being confused with John B. Smith, for example (or that) someone who has withhold of adjudication (when an offence is not entered on their permanent record) is not confused with (having) an actual conviction.
Like Arnwine, Strickland says voting rights should automatically be restored to felons who have served their sentences -- as they are in most U.S. states -- and adds that the ACLU is pushing to change the state's constitution.
Basically the whole process places the burden on the voter to prove that he or she is eligible to vote, rather than placing the burden on the state to prove that the voter isn't eligible. In a country where you're innocent till proven guilty, placing the burden on the voter sort of goes against that entire concept, she adds.
story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/oneworld/20040529/wl_oneworld/6573870821085818896
Sat May 29, 4:37 AM ET
Marty Logan, Inter Press Service (IPS)
MONTREAL, May 29 (IPS) - Some five-dozen residents of the U.S. state of Florida appeared in a hearing before Governor Jeb Bush in March to explain why they should be allowed to regain certain civil rights, including the right to vote.
But those citizens were berated about their personal debt to society or because they mistakenly voted in a previous election, says one eyewitness to the hearing.
Everything comes into play, from what medication a person is taking... it's truly shocking and gut-wrenching, says Courtenay Strickland of the American Civil Liberties Union (news - web sites) (ACLU).
Four times a year, Bush, brother of President George W. Bush (news - web sites), and three other members of the Board of Executive Clemency hold hearings in which some of the 600,000 Florida residents who have lost their civil rights after being convicted of a felony can apply to have them reinstated.
Florida is one of seven U.S. states where convicted felons who have served out their sentences have to apply to get their rights restored.
About one-half -- 28 -- of the Mar. 18 petitioners were successful, leaving roughly 35,000 more who have applied for restoration and are awaiting a reply or notice of a hearing, according to Strickland, director of the ACLU's Florida Voting Rights Project..
But according to early estimates, another 40,000 residents risk losing their voting privileges before November's presidential election. That is the number of former felons on a list distributed by Florida elections officials to supervisors who are responsible for compiling local voters' lists in the state's 67 counties.
Such an outcome would recall the disgraced 2000 election, which was finally decided, in favour of George W. Bush, by the U.S. Supreme Court (news - web sites). Thousands of Florida residents -- disproportionately African-Americans, who traditionally back the opposition Democratic Party -- were wrongly stopped from voting in that election.
And it is only one of many worries for voting rights advocates heading into the final stretch before the November vote.
A newly formed coalition of groups said this week it is particularly worried about: the confusing voter registration and identification requirements; misused and malfunctioning voting machines; and inaccurate counting of ballots cast by voters who may be voting in the wrong local districts.
Led by the League of Women Voters and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the coalition wants states to provide complete lists of registered voters to each precinct so that local officials can deal with eligible voters who turn up in the wrong precinct.
It is also pressing for better training for volunteer poll workers on registration and identification rules and on how to use voting machines.
The coalition is not even delving into the controversial area of electronic, touch-screen voting, which one expert who evaluated systems used in 37 states likened to Swiss cheese.
Thanks to the Florida Election Reform Act of 2001 that state is now blocked from contracting out the compiling of the electoral rolls -- which resulted in a number of lawsuits against the state following the 2000 election that was finally decided by 537 votes -- and has developed a central database of voters.
But that does not mean the lists used for November's polls will be any more accurate, say Strickland and other voting rights advocates.
I really question whether, if this statute would have been in place in 2000, if more people would not have been erroneously removed.
Even if the list is more accurate this year, I think we run a real risk of having just as many folks potentially removed erroneously because of this whole new statutory process, she told IPS.
The new process includes using certified mail to warn potential purged voters that they are in danger of losing their rights.
One problem with that is, the records are very clear that African-American voters in particular do not respond to letters; they do not respond to newspaper ads (the next step in officially notifying residents at risk of losing their rights), says Barbara Arnwine, executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
African-Americans were nearly 10 times more likely to have their ballots rejected in the 2000 election in Florida, the Washington Post reported in 2001. A total of 19,000 residents were incorrectly listed as felons on that list, according to the ACLU and other groups.
What we believe is very important is that the state of Florida knows better and the (office) that sends out this letter is in violation of the rights of citizens, Arnwine added in an interview this week with National Public Radio (NPR).
Too many people are on (the new) list, according to Arnwine, arguing, for instance, that it does not take into account those felons who had their rights restored before 1984.
But one county supervisor says the fact that he has restored 553 former felons to his list illustrates that voting this year will be a fair process.
My personal intent is to look at every single opportunity that I have to keep a person on the voter registration rolls, says Buddy Johnson, supervisor of elections for Florida's Hillsborough County. We're very serious, very cautious and very deliberate in this determination, he told NPR.
Those people who arrive at the polls and see their name is not on the list can also vote using a provisional ballot. We take great pride in our process of keeping people on the rolls, Johnson added.
But Strickland says the law, not goodwill, now requires that local voting supervisors do their utmost to verify the information they receive from the new central database, which is collected from a number of other sources, but that the state's elections department has not made that clear.
The ACLU has written voting supervisors, asking them to independently verify the data, meaning that John A. Smith is not being confused with John B. Smith, for example (or that) someone who has withhold of adjudication (when an offence is not entered on their permanent record) is not confused with (having) an actual conviction.
Like Arnwine, Strickland says voting rights should automatically be restored to felons who have served their sentences -- as they are in most U.S. states -- and adds that the ACLU is pushing to change the state's constitution.
Basically the whole process places the burden on the voter to prove that he or she is eligible to vote, rather than placing the burden on the state to prove that the voter isn't eligible. In a country where you're innocent till proven guilty, placing the burden on the voter sort of goes against that entire concept, she adds.