GOP uses clout to hurt Dems

In politics, the winners set the agenda. In the states, that enables them to redraw district lines every decade to improve their chances in future elections. Democrats did it previously, and, this year, Republicans did it in states like Texas.

But in many states, GOP majorities used their clout in additional ways designed to disadvantage the Democrats.

According to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School, new laws “could make it significantly harder” for 5 million eligible voters to vote next year — many elderly, low income, minority or student voters more apt to vote Democratic.

On Tuesday, voters in Maine voted to overturn the effort to abolish Election Day registration, through which 60,000 Maine citizens voted in 2008. And in Washington, a federal court blocked the latest Republican gerrymander of Texas House districts.

But in most states, GOP actions will stand.

Arizona

Two recent moves stand out, one taken, one threatened. In Arizona, at Republican Gov. Jan Brewer’s behest, the GOP-controlled state Senate removed the nonpartisan chairwoman of the state’s bipartisan redistricting panel, claiming “gross misconduct” after it drew congressional lines Republicans didn’t like.

In Pennsylvania, legislative Republicans may change how electoral votes are cast. Instead of going to the statewide victor, as in every state except Maine and Nebraska, one vote would go to the winner in each congressional district, using redrawn lines that favor the GOP.

Even if Democrats won the state, as they have in nine of the last 13 elections, they could lose more than half of its electoral votes, increasing the likelihood that the national popular vote winner would lose.

The Pennsylvania proposal — which even some top Republican oppose — might make sense in a perfect world where all states did it and congressional districts were allocated fairly. But that’s not the case.

Indeed, many GOP-enacted electoral “reforms” seem to make sense — until one examines their potential impact.

The most widespread change, the Brennan Center says, is the requirement by Texas and four other states that voters show a government-issued photo identification card like a driver’s license, to combat alleged “voter fraud.” It says 3.2 million voters in those states lack state-issued photo IDs.

Other laws would restrict early voting, make it harder for convicted felons to regain voting rights, require voters to prove their citizenship and restrict registration drives by requiring registrars to meet the same citizenship requirements as voters.

Federal law requires all voters to show identification, but not necessarily government-issued photo IDs. The new Texas rules accept a state-issued license to carry a concealed handgun, but not a student ID. The changes would likely disenfranchise more Democrats than Republicans, since many younger, older and poorer people, especially minorities, don’t own cars and lack driver’s licenses.

Besides, studies show there isn’t much voter fraud. In 2007, The New York Times reported that a five-year Bush administration Justice Department effort to crack down on voter fraud produced only 86 convictions.

ACORN

The most publicized examples have been efforts by ACORN, a pro-Democratic citizen’s action group, to register non-existent people. Some ACORN workers have been convicted of charges like conspiracy to commit voter fraud. The organization was fined $5,000 for violating a Nevada law forbidding bonus payments for registering voters. But there is no clear evidence that ACORN’s efforts produced many fraudulent votes.

Ironically, the Arizona flap was a GOP backlash against a system designed to reduce redistricting partisanship.

The GOP’s ostensible reason for removing chairwoman Colleen Mathis was its contention the panel violated technical requirements including an open meeting rule. But the real reason is that party leaders disliked its plan.

As for the claim of “gross misconduct,” the Arizona Republic reported that Senate Majority Leader Andy Biggs, justifying Mathis’ ouster, told a reporter for Capital Media Services: “Gross misconduct is essentially what the Legislature says gross misconduct is.”

Carl P. Leubsdorf is the former Washington bureau chief of the Dallas Morning News. Distributed by MCT Information Services.