[EL] State A.G. and action on voting rights

[Dan Meek]

Regarding voter registration at DMVs:  Oregon for one year has 
implemented a system that automatically registers everyone who has a 
transaction at DMV (one that requires proof of U.S. Citizenship), if 
that person is not already on the voter rolls.  The new registrant 
receives a letter from the Secretary of State about a month later, 
offering her the option of returning a postcard to opt out of 
registration or to join a political party. So far, about 8% of letter 
recipients are opting out.  Of the rest, 12% are joining political 
parties, and the rest are not responding (and are therefore becoming 
NAVs).  So 88% of the new registrants are NAVs.

Prior to automatic registration via DMV records, 76% of Oregon's 
registered voters had joined parties.  Only 12% of automatic registrants 
are joining parties, probably because the step of choosing a party is 
now separated (by at least a month and a separate form and the need to 
mail it in) from the step of registering to vote.

Oregon added about 400,000 new registrants in 2016; of those, 292,000 
were added via the automatic DMV program, and 256,000 of them are NAVs.

Why does it matter?  Oregon allows each major party to decide whether to 
have a closed or open primary.  The Democratic and Republican primaries 
are nearly always closed to NAVs.  The Independent Party of Oregon (has 
about 5% of all registered voters as members) primary is always open to 
NAVs.  So being a NAV means not being able to vote for candidates in the 
2 largest primary elections in every cycle.  A NAV can, however, join 
the D or R party and vote in its primary, if that is done at least 20 
days before the primary election.

Dan Meek

	503-293-9021 	dan at meek.net <mailto:dan at meek.net>	855-280-0488 fax


On 2/27/2017 1:32 PM, Hess, Doug wrote:
> "I think the bigger problem is that DMVs, supportive service agencies, etc., don't see voter registration as part of their jobs. I suspect many of them see it as an annoying extra thing they have to do that ultimately detracts from (what they perceive as) their core mission, which is getting people their drivers licenses or getting benefits."
>
> I think that is partly the story on why noncompliance is so common. See Hess, Hanmer, and Nickerson 2016 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/puar.12473/abstract
>
>
> "They argue (and they are probably not wrong) that their average client cares infinitely more about getting their license, or getting their car registered, or getting some tangible benefit like SNAP. Those things have concrete, urgent meaning to the person sitting at the window after waiting 3 hours. So the staff at those agencies are try to meet that demand. They do not see voter registration as important or urgent, because they don't think their clients do either."
>
> This is often argued, but the data proves it wrong. When offered in a meaningful way, a large percentage of those not registered DO register to vote at these agencies. In MO for instance, after clients are asked if they want to register, clients can reply "no" or "no, I am already registered" or "yes" (meaning they want to register) or they cannot check anything (leave the boxes blank). Of clients that are asked to register minus those who indicate they are registered, the average percentage that check "yes" in a county in a given month varies from around 23% to over 35%, depending on the month. That's not bad. However, MO has had a tighter implementation and monitoring plan even in the last decade than most states. (I.e., many states see much worse performance, in part, due to performance.)
>
> Douglas R Hess
> Assistant Professor of Political Science
> Grinnell College
> 1210 Park Street, Carnegie Hall #309
> Grinnell, IA 50112
> phone: 641-269-4383
>
> http://www.douglasrhess.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Benson [mailto:kbenson at whitehartlaw.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 11:59 AM
> To: Hess, Doug <HESSDOUG at Grinnell.EDU>; law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> Subject: Re: [EL] State A.G. and action on voting rights
>
> It's an interesting question, and I think the result (just defending NVRA lawsuits, rather than suing state agencies for compliance) derives from the AG's typical role as simply providing legal advice and representation to agencies. There's often scarcely enough money in the budget to actively sue over "traditional" AG role items like consumer protection or environmental issues. And in those cases you're usually suing a private party, not another agency. For better or worse, taxpayers don't like watching their state sue itself.
>
> I think AGs generally do see NVRA compliance as part of their jobs, just like they advise clients on employment discrimination, civil rights or ADA issues, etc. But AGs often don't have direct control over their clients or any ability to make them comply if the client fails or refuses. The AG likely doesn't even know about the issue until it's at the brink of litigation.
>
> I think the bigger problem is that DMVs, supportive service agencies, etc., don't see voter registration as part of their jobs. I suspect many of them see it as an annoying extra thing they have to do that ultimately detracts from (what they perceive as) their core mission, which is getting people their drivers licenses or getting benefits. They argue (and they are probably not wrong) that their average client cares infinitely more about getting their license, or getting their car registered, or getting some tangible benefit like SNAP. Those things have concrete, urgent meaning to the person sitting at the window after waiting 3 hours. So the staff at those agencies are try to meet that demand. They do not see voter registration as important or urgent, because they don't think their clients do either.
>
>
> Kevin Benson, Esq.
> White Hart Law
> 2310 S. Carson Street #6
> Carson City, NV 89701
> (775) 461-3780
> kbenson at whitehartlaw.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
> [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Hess, Doug
> Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 8:49 AM
> To: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> Subject: [EL] State A.G. and action on voting rights
>
>
> Reading the article in the link below (first paragraph also below) caused me to wonder again about the role of state Attorneys General in election reform and implementation.
>
> Do states have differences in the AG role that would explain why a state AG would "unveil" an act? Or is this largely a difference in strategy, careerism, etc. of an office holder?
>
> On a related question, one of greater interest to me, I've always wondered why AG offices have (largely) played a role in implementation of the NVRA by defending their state against charges of noncompliance. Even when the issue of noncompliance has not reached litigation, I don't sense the state AG offices see state compliance with law as their job. Is that generally true of their approach to state compliance with federal civil rights? Do state AG offices have no tools for enforcement when it comes to state and local governments? I.e., if a state agency or county is not complying with state or federal disability laws, would the state AG ever sue or take other action to enforce compliance?
>
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__prospect.org_article_ag-2Daction&d=DwICAg&c=HUrdOLg_tCr0UMeDjWLBOM9lLDRpsndbROGxEKQRFzk&r=xr_OjwGHtP-zw6I-DJj_MQ4cusLbiVT1bScGa0c8ZJo&m=O4Rbp-tEZDrF5nO_hWv7f1bR63fKYwbVTCMVDTndmgM&s=KcZPnj9dMGGwvJfgXouM4l5pSdm6NmDiq8dI74Ir4Ek&e=
>
> "Last week on the steps of Federal Hall, the Wall Street building where George Washington was inaugurated and the Bill of Rights was introduced, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman unveiled the New York Votes Act, a package of election reforms he hopes can transform his state into a national leader on voting rights."
>
>
> Douglas R Hess
> Assistant Professor of Political Science Grinnell College
> 1210 Park Street, Carnegie Hall #309
> Grinnell, IA 50112
> phone: 641-269-4383
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.douglasrhess.com&d=DwICAg&c=HUrdOLg_tCr0UMeDjWLBOM9lLDRpsndbROGxEKQRFzk&r=xr_OjwGHtP-zw6I-DJj_MQ4cusLbiVT1bScGa0c8ZJo&m=O4Rbp-tEZDrF5nO_hWv7f1bR63fKYwbVTCMVDTndmgM&s=ftUWITmJsaWJlkSBNWUtiKQWLYT-gFVGew2u1mLpXOo&e=
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__department-2Dlists.uci.edu_mailman_listinfo_law-2Delection&d=DwICAg&c=HUrdOLg_tCr0UMeDjWLBOM9lLDRpsndbROGxEKQRFzk&r=xr_OjwGHtP-zw6I-DJj_MQ4cusLbiVT1bScGa0c8ZJo&m=O4Rbp-tEZDrF5nO_hWv7f1bR63fKYwbVTCMVDTndmgM&s=LMxsXP7YMnzF9e6Bi5w3oSmWOG_Rvg2nWZEpigWTwRw&e=
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20170227/8c0ac960/attachment.html>