The Balance of Power in Wisconsin Could Shift Because of Fairer New Maps

by Marilyn Go

Edited by Jim Harbison, Ryan O’Connell, Jacki Swearingen, Vivian Lewis and Debbie Winn

­

Wisconsin, a state with 10 electoral votes, has been a battleground state in recent Presidential elections.  Along with Michigan and Pennsylvania, this state makes up a trio of Rustbelt industrial states that presidential candidates from both parties have long sought to capture. This November, Wisconsin may yet again be a key step in the path to an electoral college victory.

Wisconsin voters voted for Democratic presidential candidates from 1988 until 2016, when former President Donald J. Trump unexpectedly won Wisconsin by a margin of less than 23,000 votes over Hillary Clinton, approximately 0.8% of the total vote.  In 2020, President Joe Biden eked out a win over Trump in Wisconsin by even a smaller margin. 

The importance of Wisconsin to the Republican Party's plans was underscored by the party's selection of Milwaukee as the site of the Republican National Convention which was held July 15 to 18.  (The Democratic Party had selected Milwaukee to host the 2020 Democratic National convention, but activities were primarily held online because of Covid-19 concerns).

However, the glow from a successful conclusion of the Republican Convention in Milwaukee was quickly overshadowed by President Biden’s announcement on July 21 that he would not seek re-election as President.  After declaring that she would run for President, Vice President Kamala Harris went to Milwaukee for her first campaign stop. 

Another statewide race of potential national impact is the election for one of Wisconsin’s U.S. Senate seats.  Tammy Baldwin, a popular Senator who has served two terms and is seeking reelection, was unopposed in the primary election held on August 13, 2024.  In the Republican column, Eric Hovde, a multimillionaire businessman from Madison, ran a self-financed campaign with the backing of the National Republican Committee.  Hovde easily defeated State Senator Charles E. Barman, who ran as an “independent” farmer, and Rejani Raveendran, a single mother and an immigrant seeking to "bring the perspective of people and regular moms to Washington."  Current polls project that Baldwin will prevail over Hovde.

Democrats hold only two of Wisconsin’s eight Congressional seats. This is partially because Democratic voters are concentrated in the two largest cities, Milwaukee and Madison. Another critical factor is that the congressional districts suffer from extreme partisan gerrymandering. Nonetheless, in March 2023, the Wisconsin Supreme Court deadlocked 3-3 in declining to hear a challenge to Congressional maps drawn in 2022. Nonetheless, two GOP Representatives may face competitive races in November, and Democrats are hopeful that the newly competitive local races may boost turnout for in other races. 

State Legislature: Wisconsin has been one of the most gerrymandered states in the country for many years and Republicans have held near super-majorities in the Assembly and Senate, despite the "purple hue" of the electorate.  Wisconsin has been described as a “democracy desert,”[1] and observers feared that “[a]nti-democratic politicians supported by safe seats and polarization have walked through and begun enacting an authoritarian playbook.” Kleinfeld, Rachel, “Five Strategies to Support U.S. Democracy.”

However, when Janet Protasiewicz was elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court in a special election in April 2023, the majority on the Court shifted from conservative to liberal. With Justice Protasiewicz siding with the three other liberal judges when she took the bench, the Court agreed to hear a lawsuit brought by Democrats challenging the 2022 state redistricting maps adopted by the Republicans legislature as extreme partisan gerrymandering. In December 2023, the Wisconsin Supreme Court struck down the maps, finding that the maps violated the requirement in Wisconsin’s Constitution that districts must be contiguous. The Court did not reach the gerrymandering arguments raised, even though the experts retained by the Supreme Court to review the maps noted that the Republican-drawn maps were gerrymanders which "did not deserve further consideration.” See the Court Report of the Court-appointed Co-consultants in Clarke V. Wisconsin Elections Commission by Dr. Bernard Grofman and Dr. Jonathan Cervas.  

In February 2024, the Republican-dominated state legislature and Democratic Governor Tony Evers reached a bipartisan agreement for the first time in 50 years on new redistricting legislative maps. These maps are expected to make many Assembly and Senate races far more competitive this fall. Even though the Supreme Court’s consultants noted that the maps are “tilted toward the Republicans,” in their view the maps are sufficiently competitive that “the party that wins the most votes will win the most seats.” (citing Report above).  As commentators have noted, the new maps “could substantially shift the balance of political power in Wisconsin.” 

Perhaps spurred by the new maps, Democratic candidates are running for 97 of 99 Assembly seats, in contrast to past elections where several Republican candidates ran unopposed. Republicans currently hold 64 Assembly seats. However, since many districts were redrawn substantially, many incumbents may face contests in very different districts, which will add to the unpredictability of election outcomes.

In the state Senate, the Republicans currently hold 22 out of 31 seats. Because only the seats in even-numbered districts are up for election in November, the Democrats are not likely to win enough races to expand their nine seats into a majority.

In recent litigation of note, Dane County Circuit Judge Evert Mitchell ruled that disabled voters who cannot cast paper ballots without assistance could email absentee ballots from their homes for the November presidential election. On August 1, Judge Mitchell denied a request to stay his ruling pending an appeal by Republicans. This litigation highlights the additional obstacles to voting that disabled people in Wisconsin face in exercising their right to vote.

Demographics: Wisconsin has had steady growth in population and currently has over 5.9 million people, making it the 20th most populous state. The state’s population is predominantly white, although the percentage has declined from 92% in 1990 to about 80% in 2024. Of the remaining population, the 2020 Census indicated that 8.1 % is Hispanic or Latino, 6.6% is Black or African American, and 3.3 % Asian, with the remainder categorized as “other” or “two or more races.” In the remaining group, 1.2 % are Native Americans.

About 70% of Wisconsin’s citizens reside in the major urban areas such as Milwaukee (over 600,000) and Madison (about 150,000).  The remaining 30% of the  people reside primarily in rural, agrarian areas (see article from UW Applied Population Laboratory discussing the nuances of the urban/rural dichotomy in Wisconsin). Milwaukee has a substantial Black population, and Madison, a university town, has a large student population.  

Marquette University Law School has periodically issued results of polls it has taken of Wisconsin voters on their preferences in the upcoming presidential election.  The report that Marquette released on August 7 shows the presidential race in a dead heat, with Wisconsin voters preferring Trump over Harris by 1% (50% to 49%) and the percentages reversed among likely voters.  The Washington Post reported also on August 7 that based on its average of Wisconsin polls that Harris has a less than 1% lead.  Most other polls as of that date show Harris with a very small lead around 1%. 

The polls were taken before the announcement by Harris of her selection of Minnesota Governor Tim Walz to run as Vice President. Also, most polls focus on head-to-head matches between Harris and Trump, but there will also be a number of third party candidates which could affect polling, as well as outcomes [2]. Already on the ballot are Jill Stein (Green Party) and Chase Oliver (Libertarian Party). As of the drafting of this article, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. had filed to be added to the ballot, too. Suffice to say, poll numbers have been changing and will continue to change until the election.

Reproductive Health: Abortion is also a matter of concern to Wisconsin voters, as reflected in the election of Justice Protasiewicz to the Wisconsin Supreme Court discussed above.  See New York Times article here (noting that Justice Protasiewicz’s “commanding victory … showed the enduring power of abortion rights and issues of democracy as motivators for Democratic voters”).  Immediately following the overturning of Roe v. Wade in June 2022 by the U.S. Supreme Court in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Org., all abortions in Wisconsin ceased because of application of an archaic pre-Civil War statute.  In a lawsuit brought by Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin to halt prosecutions under that statute, Dane County Circuit Court Judge Diane Schlipper ruled that the state statute banned feticide, but not abortions performed with a woman’s consent.  As a result, abortions are again being performed, but subject to the many pre-Dobbs restrictions existing in Wisconsin, including a 20-week ban after contraception, a mandatory waiting period, and counseling requirements.  Judge Schlipper’s decision was appealed directly to the Wisconsin Supreme Court and is currently pending, together with the following case.  

In February 2024, Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin filed a petition to the Wisconsin Supreme Court challenging the statute raised before Judge Schlipper and arguing that the statute violates the Wisconsin state constitution and a woman’s right to an abortion. In June, the Supreme Court issued an order indicating an oral argument would be held this fall.  Whether the ruling occurs in time to affect the outcome of the November elections remains to be seen.  Incumbent Senator Tammy Baldwin is an outspoken supporter of reproductive freedom who sponsored the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2023 to restore the right to comprehensive reproductive services nationally.  Her opponent, Republican Eric Hovde, is running for the second time.  Although Hovde supported the overturn of Roe v. Wade in 2012, he changed his view and now says he supports permitting pregnancy termination in the first 12-14 weeks.

Referendum questions: There were two referendum questions [3] on the August 13 primary election ballot to amend the Wisconsin Constitution to give the legislature authority for distribution of funds and require the governor to obtain legislative approval (see here).  The referendum was proposed by the Republican controlled legislature as a way to diminish the power of the Governor, who is Democratic, and increase its own power (see here).  The voters answered “Yes” to both referenda questions.”No” to both referenda questions.“Yes” “No” to Question 1 and “Yes”/”No” Question 2.“Yes” “No” to Question 1 and “Yes”/”No” Question 2.  

What You Can Do.  Most importantly, you should be sure that you are registered to vote and that you vote on November 5.  You should also encourage people you know to do so.  The vote in Wisconsin could be critical in determining who will be President, and  the election of one of its Senators in November might determine which political party controls the U.S. Senate.  If you have not registered to vote, the deadline for registering online or by mail is October 16, 2024. 

However, you can also register in person on election day, November 5, 2024, provided you bring both a Wisconsin approved Proof of Residency and a Wisconsin approved Photo ID.  Early voting for this election begins on Tuesday, October 22, and runs through Sunday, November 3.  You can also vote by absentee ballot and use absentee-ballot-drop boxes, which the Wisconsin Supreme Court allowed in a 4-3 ruling in early July.  Information regarding registering to vote, absentee ballots, and identification requirements for voting in person is available on the website of the State of Wisconsin Elections Commission.   

You can also work to increase voter turnout by working with Wisconsin voting rights organizations, including the following:

·  All Voting is Local Wisconsin works with key partners, including county clerks across the state and state and local groups, to ensure that elections are run fairly and smoothly.

·  Common Cause Wisconsin focuses on election and redistricting reform, as well as other issues concerning the promotion of clean, open, and responsive government.

·  Souls to the Polls Wisconsin is a non-partisan voter education and advocacy faith-led organization seeking to strengthen the Black Community by providing voting information and free rides to the polls for Milwaukee voters.

·  Wisconsin Conservation Voices runs Wisconsin Native Vote, which registers, educates, and engages voters in tribal communities.

·  Wisconsin Disability Vote Coalition is a non-partisan organization working to increase voting turnout and participation among members of Wisconsin’s disability community.   

[1]Journalist David Daley coined the term “democracy desert” in describing the extreme gerrymandering in Wisconsin which effectively deprived voters of the power to effect political change.  See here.   

[2]  See Gibson, Brittany, et al., “Where third-party candidates could spoil 2024,” (6/25/2024, updated 8/13/2024)  (noting that in 2020, Biden won Wisconsin by just over 20,000 votes, which was fewer that the number of votes that the Libertarian Party candidate received in that election).

[3] The referendum questions are written as follows:

QUESTION 1: “Delegation of appropriation power. Shall section 35 (1) of article IV of the constitution be created to provide that the legislature may not delegate its sole power to determine how moneys shall be appropriated?”

QUESTION 2: “Allocation of federal moneys. Shall section 35 (2) of article IV of the constitution be created to prohibit the governor from allocating any federal moneys the governor accepts on behalf of the state without the approval of the legislature by joint resolution or as provided by legislative rule?”

By Jacki Swearingen and Susan Okie

Edited by Marilyn Go, Jim Harbison and Ryan O’Connell

Nevada, which helped deliver victory to Biden in 2020, now appears close to slipping from the Democrats’ grasp in the November election. The economic woes of the last several years – inflation, higher interest rates, limited housing stock – have contributed to a deep disenchantment among voters in a state where Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump by 2.4 points four years ago. Democrats hope their traditional success with Latino voters and their formidable “Get out the vote” machine can secure the state’s six electoral votes once again, while Republicans point to the widespread discontent as a sign that they will prevail in the fall.

Nevada voters will also make crucial choices about abortion rights and a US Senate race that could decide the control of the Senate. Legislative races will determine whether the Democrats in the state assembly and senate secure a veto-proof majority. All these far-reaching decisions by Nevadans will occur in a state where efforts at making it harder to cast a ballot as well as challenges to election results have grown since 2020.

 

The Polls That Stoke Anxiety and Hope

A spate of recent state polls has increased Democratic anxiety. Results from the Emerson College Polling/The Hill survey released on April 30 gave Trump a 45% to 44% lead over Biden in a head-to-head match-up in Nevada, with 11% of voters undecided. More worrisome for Democrats was the May 15 New York Times/Siena Poll in which Trump led Biden by 12 points among registered Nevada voters. Concerns about the economy and inflation ranked at the top for Nevada voters. Sixty one percent trusted Trump to manage the economy better; only 32% preferred Biden to handle it.

“The state has been slowly shifting to the right – not just in polling but in Election Day results,” wrote John Ralston, the esteemed observer of Nevada politics last year in The Atlantic. Ralston added, “In 2020 Nevada was the only battleground state that saw worse Democratic performance compared with 2016, unless you count the more solidly red Florida.” In 2022 Nevada Democrat Catherine Cortez Masto won re-election to the US Senate by a mere 9,000 votes.

Five months from Election Day, long-time political observers caution that it is still too early to make firm predictions. Strategists on both sides would be wise to heed Ralston’s warnings about the difficulties of polling in the Silver State. Ralston points out that pollsters often underestimate the number of people they need to survey to get a representative sampling. In addition, pollsters often lack enough bilingual interviewers for a state whose population is one-third Latino.

Demographics and the Latino Vote

Most political experts agree that demographics and voter turnout in one of the nation’s fastest- growing states will play key roles in the election’s outcome.  Among Nevada’s more than 3,100,000 residents, about 46% are white and non-Hispanic and about 30% are Hispanic. Nevada’s Black population is about 11% percent and its Asian population is 9.4 percent. Native Americans make up 5.1 percent of its population. The average age for a resident is 38 years.

In recent elections Democrats have counted on strong support from Nevada’s Latino voters to lift them to victory. In 2020 about sixty percent of Latino voters cast their ballots for Biden. In 2022 a nearly identical percentage backed Sen. Cortez-Masto. However, recent polls suggest that this traditional support is eroding, particularly because of Latinos’ frustration with economic problems. Among Latino voters in Nevada polled recently in the NYT/Siena Poll, Trump led Biden by nine points.

Economic Issues Trouble Voters

For both parties, the economic issues that affect individual voters and their families – the cost of groceries, gasoline, mortgages and rent – cannot be ignored by simply touting GDP increases. Nevada’s unemployment rate of 5.1 percent is down significantly from its high of 30.6 percent during the early days of the pandemic, but it remains the highest in the nation. Gas prices hover at $4.80 per gallon, the country’s third highest, even though they have dropped nearly $2 since mid-2022. And in the nation’s worst housing crisis, home prices since 2011 have jumped six times higher than wage increases.

In Clark County, where 73 percent of the population live in or around Las Vegas, the median household income is $5,000 less than the national average. The poverty rate is almost two percent higher. Most adults work long hours for low wages in the casinos, hotels and service industries that shore up Las Vegas, the principal city. Only 26 percent of residents hold a bachelor’s degree. All these factors have helped the GOP to make inroads, particularly with voters who lack a college or high school degree.

Faced with weak poll numbers, President Joe Biden’s strategy is to point to his administration’s economic successes like job growth and affordable housing initiatives. During his time in office Nevada has gained 285,000 jobs. Biden’s 2021 American Rescue Plan provided $1 billion for affordable housing units nationwide, which his 2025 Budget would build upon with $285 million for initiatives like building new units and increasing rental assistance.

On his recent trips to Nevada, Biden touted the $3 billion allocated in the Infrastructure Bill for the Brightline Rail, the nation’s first high-speed rail, which will connect Las Vegas and Southern California. Groundbreaking for the $12 billion project, which is projected to create more than 35,000 jobs, was April 22.

In contrast, Republicans hone in on the high costs of inflation, particularly for the working poor. They echo Trump’s belief that sharply increasing the production of fossil fuels would lower the cost of gasoline and virtually everything else. Trump’s plan to lease even more public lands for oil drilling and fracking is likely to include the Great Basin Desert in Nevada, where the Trump administration in its final months auctioned off 50 square miles and triggered environmental protests.

The Reid Machine

While Democratic strategists acknowledge the impact of economic worries and border issues on Nevada voters, they remain confident that they have a better ground game in place, particularly in the two most populous counties of Clark and Washoe, the home of Reno. In these urban centers the Reid Machine, named after the late Majority Leader of the US Senate Harry Reid, has delivered victories time after time. Since 2008 the Reid Machine has helped put Nevada in the Democratic column in presidential elections, thanks largely to its partnership with the Culinary Workers Union.

The union’s more than 60,000 members cook in the kitchens and clean the hotel rooms of the flashy hotels and casinos of Las Vegas and Reno. During campaign seasons their volunteer teams register voters and inform them about candidates and issues. When elections roll around, many volunteers spread out to knock on doors and drive voters to the polls in one of the nation’s largest turnout operations.

Biden strategists are counting on this infrastructure to energize voters, particularly in Latino communities because 54 percent of union members are Hispanic. In 2022 they played a crucial role in Cortez Masto’s Senate victory. But they failed to re-elect Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak, who no doubt lost votes because of the toll the pandemic took on Nevada’s hospitality industry.

An Unpredictable Election     

Adding to the unpredictability of November election results is the large percentage of the more than two million Nevada voters registered as independents. They make up 33 percent, followed by Democrats at 31 percent, and Republican voters at 28 percent.

Moreover, the specter of past voter suppression efforts compounds the uncertainty. “Nevada has a zealous election denial movement that has been a disruptive force in the past two election cycles,” a 2023 Brennan Center study reported.

Four years ago armed vigilantes stood outside the vote-counting center in Clark County, and Republicans sued unsuccessfully to halt the counting of absentee ballots. Election deniers claimed there was mass fraud across Nevada—allegations that the Secretary of State investigated and rejected. In addition, the Trump campaign attempted to get a court order to access voting machine software, but the Nevada courts denied that request. In the 2022 Senate race some local officials tried to substitute hand-counting of ballots for machine tabulation.

In this election cycle a problem that looms is the loss of nearly one-half of the state’s top election officials because of harassment and threats. Those forms of intimidation have also driven away many election workers at individual precincts who kept voting running smoothly and accurately.

This past April Trump and the Republican National Committee announced a “100,000 person strong” initiative to target election workers in Nevada and other states.

On the other hand, some developments bode well for free and fair voting in Nevada. In 2022 Democrat Francisco “Cisco” Aguilar defeated an election denier to become the Secretary of State. And over the last two years the Nevada legislature has passed additional statutory protections against voter intimidation and safeguards for absentee ballots during signature review.

Efforts to tighten requirements for voting persist in Nevada, however. In late May the Nevada Supreme Court ruled that an initiative to amend the state constitution to require voter ID can appear on the November ballot if supporters obtain the necessary 100,000 signatures by June 26. The Supreme Court is considering another case that would tighten mail-in ballot requirements, a proposal opposed by many advocacy groups for seniors and veterans.

Abortion Rights on the Ballot

The likelihood that an abortion rights referendum will be on the November ballot in Nevada has buoyed Democratic confidence in the face of unfavorable poll numbers. The referendum places abortion rights front and center and promises to increase voter turnout. Reproductive rights advocates hope that the Nevada measure will prevail in November, as have similar initiatives in six other states.

Compared with abortion laws in other U.S. states, Nevada’s can be considered middle-of-the-road. Nevada is neither among the states most protective of reproductive rights nor among the most restrictive. Abortion is permitted until 24 weeks of pregnancy have elapsed, a point at which a fetus is considered potentially viable outside the womb. Nevada allows only physicians to perform abortions, not other trained health care professionals. A shield law protects doctors who do so from being investigated by authorities in other states. Women entering an abortion clinic are legally protected from harassment or physical harm.

As in neighboring Arizona, supporters of reproductive rights in Nevada, with funding from The Nevada Reproductive Freedom PAC, have gathered signatures in favor of an ambitious ballot referendum, The Nevada Right to Reproductive Freedom Amendment.

The amendment would codify women’s right to abortion in Nevada. An opposing PAC, the Coalition for Parents and Children, is supporting conservative organizations as it seeks to keep the referendum off the ballot.

To place the measure onto the ballot, proponents of the constitutional amendment had to obtain 102,362 validated signatures of Nevada residents by June 26, 2024. In late May Nevada Reproductive Freedom submitted more than 200,000 signatures from all 17 counties to the Secretary of State for validation. If enough signatures are deemed valid, the measure will go on the November ballot. Even if enough voters support the amendment, they must approve it again in 2026 for it to go into effect.  

Other Consequential Races  

Adding to the high stakes in Nevada this election cycle is a US Senate race that the Cook Political Report rates a “toss-up.” Incumbent Jacky Rosen is a center-left Democrat who has garnered a bipartisan reputation during her six years in the Senate. A member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Rosen has a strong following among veterans, who make up 200,000 of Nevada’s population. In the most recent NYT/Siena poll, she led her  Republican opponent, Sam Brown. However, 23 percent of voters were undecided or refused to answer.

Sam Brown, who just received Donald Trump’s endorsement, nearly won the Republican nomination for US Senator in 2022. He is a former Army Captain and Purple Heart recipient who was badly burned in 2008 by the explosion of an improvised explosive device in Afghanistan. Brown is seeking to appeal to independent voters, and he recently switched his position on abortion rights to support the current law, which allows abortions up to 24 weeks of pregnancy.

Despite the closeness of the presidential race in Nevada, Democrats hope to win a super-majority in the state’s legislature. If they can hold onto their current senate seats and flip one Republican district, they will achieve a two-thirds majority in the upper house, matching the one they have in the state assembly. That would allow them to override any vetoes by Republican Gov. Joe Lombardi. The governor set a state record last year for vetoing the most bills in a single session of the Nevada Legislature.

What You Can Do

Nevada has emerged not only as a key battleground state but also as the possible determinant of which party will control the US Senate. Early voting for this critical election begins Saturday, October 19 and runs through Friday, November 1. You can play a role by registering new voters and increasing voter turnout by working with the following organizations: 

1. All Voting is Local – Nevada: All Voting is Local Nevada works to protect voting access and pro-voting policies and prevent election sabotage as well as increase language access for all urban, rural and tribal voters in the state.

2. Chicanos Por La Causa Nevada – Chicanos Por La Causa Nevada works to educate voters and to get out the Latino vote, especially among infrequent voters.

3. Nevada Native Vote Project – Nevada Native Vote Project focuses on voter registration, election protection, education and data for Native American tribes in the state, which include the Paiute and the Shoshone peoples.

4.League of Women Voters of Northern Nevada – The local branch of the national League promotes voter education and voter registration.

Written by Ryan O’Connell; edited by Marilyn Go, Jim Harbison and Jacki Swearingen

The demographics of Texas are shifting rapidly, as its booming cities draw waves of migrants attracted to the state’s growing economy, low taxes, and warm weather.

Between 2010 and 2020, Texas’ population grew by about 16% or four million people, and almost all of them (95%) were people of color. The change stemmed from births (50%) and people moving to Texas (50%). Half of the new residents came from other states (particularly California, Florida, and New York), and half from other nations. Mexicans represented 60% of the foreigners who moved to Texas.  

The main driver was a surge in the Latino population. The number of Texan Latinos rose 21% over that decade, and they accounted for half of the state’s population growth, according to Texas Redistricting and Congressional districts.  In 2020, the Latino share of the population was almost the same as that of whites (40%), and by 2022, it was slightly larger, according to updated figures from the U.S. Census Bureau.  

Here is the key takeaway: four out of 10 Texans are Latinos. 

The number of Black and Asian Texans increased rapidly, too, although from smaller bases.  In 2020 those groups constituted 11.8% and 5.4% of the population, respectively.  Meanwhile, the white population grew by only 2% in 2010-20.   

Source: Pew Research

Growth is Concentrated in The Big (Democratic) Cities  

Furthermore, almost 90% of the population growth has occurred in five major metropolitan areas:  Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Austin, and San Antonio.  Rural areas and small towns, which tend to be whiter, either have had little growth or have lost population.  Since most Latinos, Blacks and Asians lean Democratic, four of those cities have become solidly blue.  The fifth city, Fort Worth, is an evolving political mix, but has essentially become purple.    

When Beto O’Rourke, a Democrat,  ran for governor against Greg Abbott in 2022, he carried Austin, Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio, as shown in the chart below.  Fort Worth voters preferred Abbott to O’Rourke, but in 2020 Joe Biden carried the city by a razor-thin margin. Biden carried the other four cities by wide margins.

Source:  Dallas County Republican Party

The voters in these four cities have mostly elected Democratic or progressive leaders to local offices.  The mayors of Austin and Houston are Democrats, while the one in Austin is a progressive independent.  On the other hand, in 2023, the mayor of Dallas switched parties, becoming a Republican.  Fort Worth’s mayor is also a Republican.

But the Political Landscape Seems Frozen in Time

Despite these significant population shifts, the distribution of elected officials in the Texas state legislature and congressional delegation remains heavily skewed toward Republicans.  Not surprisingly, the Republican Party has retained its dominance, since the state has a unique political culture, and many rural and suburban areas are bastions of conservatism. 

There is a strong sense of Texas exceptionalism, shared by Texans of all political persuasions, based on the state’s huge size –it has an area the size of France—and its history as part of America’s frontier. In fact, Texas was a separate country for ten years, from 1836, when it gained its independence from Mexico, until it joined the United States in 1846.

Texans prize the virtues of self-reliance, independence, and grit.  Although these are admirable traits, the nostalgia for the frontier days and virtues cannot obscure the reality that most Texans live in large cities or the adjoining suburbs.  They work in a complex economy, with large technological and medical sectors as well as more traditional industries like oil and gas.  

In addition, many Texans are evangelical Christians, who are predominantly Republicans. Furthermore, turnout tends to be lower among Latinos and other minorities than among whites, partly because of obstacles to voting we will discuss below.      

Nonetheless, one would have expected Democrats to win a larger share of state and congressional districts as the number of Latino and other minority voting-age citizens increased significantly.   

Why hasn’t this happened?   

Fighting Demographic Change

The political establishment, seeing the handwriting on the wall in view of the changing demographic trends, has fought tenaciously to retain its hold on power.  Republicans have relied on two main techniques to disenfranchise minority voters:  gerrymandering and voter suppression laws.     

The entrenched party has redrawn election districts on a highly partisan basis to stack the deck against its opponents.  Republican lawmakers engaged in very aggressive gerrymandering in 2010 and again in 2021, as described by New York University’s Brennan Center for Law and Justice:

"Texas also enacted an extreme partisan gerrymander that insulates Republican rule against voter dissatisfaction. Under the new map, Democrats would have to win 58 percent of the popular vote in order to be favored to carry more than 37 percent of the state’s congressional seats. Put differently, even if Texas turned dark blue, Republicans could hold a two-to-one advantage in the state’s congressional caucus." 

Texas also has a long history of voter suppression and restrictive voting laws.  After the 2020 election its legislature adopted even more stringent measures as it sought to maintain one-party control.   We will discuss these in more detail below.  

Partisan Split in Texas 

Because Texas state officials do not collect or publish figures on voters’ political affiliation, precise numbers on Democratic and Republican voters are not available.

However, here is one possible indicator: since 1995. Republicans have won every race for governor, usually by wide margins. However, the close Senate race between Republican Ted Cruz and Democrat Beto O’Rourke in 2018 demonstrated the growing power of Democratic voters.  Cruz won re-election, but only by 2.6 percentage points.  

Since people of color have accounted for almost all the state’s population growth since 2010, it seems easy to assume that the percentage of Democratic voters has increased.  After all, Latinos still lean heavily toward the Democratic Party, according to Pew Research. 

Of course, many Latinos, like other Texans, are Republican, and the GOP may be attracting support from some Latinos concerned about inflation or border issues. But reports of a massive Latino swing toward the GOP in the Lone Star State are probably overblown. Black and Asian Americans remain overwhelmingly Democratic in their political views.    

Expanded Voting Options During Covid 

During the 2020 election, local officials in Houston and other metropolitan areas devised creative ways to make voting safer and easier during the Covid pandemic.   They established drive-through polling stations, which allowed citizens to cast their ballots from their cars.  They encouraged early voting and voting by mail as well as providing drop boxes where voters could deposit their ballots.  

These new options were particularly helpful for minority voters, most of whom were blue-collar and did not have flexible work schedules.  The drive-through polling stations and drop boxes were especially popular, since Houston is a huge, sprawling metropolis and commutes can be time-consuming.  These initiatives helped spur good turnout among voters despite the pandemic.  From a civic-minded point of view, these new approaches were a great success.  

However, the result did not please the state political establishment, since Joe Biden carried the large Texan cities.  

Setting The “Gold Standard” for Voter Suppression 

Many Republican lawmakers raised issues about alleged voting fraud in 2020, and several leading Texas politicians echoed Trump’s claims about a “stolen election”.   In 2021, state legislators enacted Senate Bill 1 (“S.B.1”), which eliminated or imposed severe restrictions on the expanded voting options.  The ostensible rationale for these measures was to protect “election integrity”.   

However, no significant voting fraud has occurred in Texas in recent years. [1]The goal, and the effect, of S.B.1 are to disenfranchise minority voters, particularly Latinos.  

The new law created numerous impediments to voting, including  

• Banning drive-through voting 

• Creating barriers to early voting and voting by mail 

• Imposing new ID requirements especially for voting by mail 

• Limiting the number and hours of operation for drop-off boxes 

• Hindering the ability of voters with language barriers or disabilities to get help casting their ballots 

• Empowering partisan poll watchers at polling stations 

• Discouraging poll workers’ oversight of partisan poll watchers 

The Eyes of Texas Are Upon You

The last two items are particularly troubling, since Texas has a long history of minority voters being intimidated.   S.B.1 expands poll watchers’ right to move around and observe polling places, including the ballot transfer and tabulation process.  Furthermore, the law makes it a crime for election workers to refuse to accept credentialed workers. 

In addition, election workers cannot remove poll watchers for violating certain election laws, unless they have personally witnessed the conduct.  So if a partisan poll watcher --perhaps wearing a gun in a state with “open carry” laws-- threatens or intimidates Black or Latino voters and they complain to an election official, an election worker cannot take any action unless he or she sees the intimidation.   

S.B. 1 had a very tangible negative effect on the conduct of the 2022 primary election.  According to the Brennan Center, 12% of mail-in ballots were rejected for failing to satisfy the new requirements. That was a 12-fold jump in the rejection rate compared to 2020.  In some counties the initial rejection rate reached 40%.  The rejection rate for minority voters was much higher than that for whites.

Federal judges have already nullified certain provisions in S.B. 1 that pertain to assisting voters and mail-in ballots.  In a lawsuit challenging other provisions of S.B.1, the parties held closing arguments in February after a six-week trial before Federal District Judge Xavier Rodriguez in San Antonio.

Severe Restrictions on Reproductive Freedom

Since 2021, Texas has been one of the most restrictive states for reproductive freedoms, after Gov. Greg Abbott signed legislation that banned terminating pregnancies after six weeks’ gestation, with rare exceptions that physicians say are unclear.  Doctors who violate the law can lose their medical licenses and face up to 99 years in prison.  This draconian measure exacerbates the state’s pre-existing physician shortage, especially for rural communities that need reproductive healthcare.

While Texas does not allow ballot initiatives, reproductive health is among the issues for Texans to consider as they head to the polls in November. Senator Ted Cruz, up for re-election, has been a staunch foe of abortion and transgender health care. Cruz supported the failed Life at Conception Act, which would have provided equal protection under the law to “preborn children” from the time of conception.  

Cruz has received endorsements from the Texas Alliance for Life, the Republican Party and Governor Greg Abbott.  Cruz’ Democratic opponent, Colin Allred, a three-term congressman, has cited freedom as a top issue, including reproductive freedom and freedom to vote. Allred’s endorsers include the Texas AFL-CIO and the Human Rights Campaign. 

Candidates’ stances on abortion in down-ballot races appear to conform strictly with their party affiliation, but the polls of likely voters reflect more nuanced views. Democrats  hope that abortion rights will be a winning issue that will drive voters to the polls. However, a recent University of Texas poll suggests that voters may consider border security and immigration more important issues.

What Can You Do?  

S. B. 1 has created a serious risk that Texas election vigilantes could intimidate voters or otherwise disrupt the election in November.  To help ensure that voters are treated fairly, you can volunteer to serve as a poll monitor.  Get in touch with Common Cause Texas.

You can also volunteer with Common Cause to contact voters who need information and support and to monitor social media, so you can report misinformation and disinformation about election issues.  You can fill the last two roles on a remote basis.  

You can also join Common Cause in advocating that Texas establish an online voter registration program.  Texas is one of the few states that does not have such a platform, which would make it easier for voters, including minority voters, to register.    

If you are a lawyer or a paralegal, you can volunteer for Election Protection, which provides advice to citizens who want to register to vote or who may encounter problems when they try to vote.  If you have a relative in law school, ask him or her to volunteer.  You can work from your office or home. EP provides training and materials on each state’s election laws and procedures.  Election Protection operates under the auspices of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a civil rights organization with about 100 partners.

Disability Rights Texas helps people with disabilities understand their voting rights, surveys polling places for accessibility, and works with election officials to ensure fair voting.

Mi Familia Vota is a national organization with a branch in Texas that is committed to empowering the Latino community and helping Latinos register and to vote.

[1] https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/texas-voter-suppression-law-trial

By Jacki Swearingen and Vivian Lewis

Edited by Jim Harbison, Ryan O’Connell and Marilyn Go

With each election in recent years Florida has turned redder. In 2018 its voters elected one of the nation’s most conservative governors. However, this November’s outcome is a little less certain because of a recent decision by the Florida Supreme Court that allows a measure to ensure reproductive rights to be on the ballot this fall.

While President Joe Biden is still unlikely to garner Florida’s 30 electoral votes, a surge in voters determined to overturn one of the nation’s strictest abortion bans could benefit Democratic candidates further down the ballot. Although voter registrations for Democrats now trail those of Republicans by four percent, Democrats hope that they can convince the growing number of independents to vote for their candidates this November. Nonetheless, Democrats still face the possibility of reduced turnout because of strict voting laws Gov. Ron DeSantis and the Florida legislature put in place over the last three years.

Demographic Changes

Just as in Georgia and Arizona, demographic changes in Florida have been accompanied by increased calls from Republicans to stamp out voter fraud. The 2020 U.S Census showed that among Florida’s population of 22 million residents, non-Hispanic white residents decreased to 51 percent from 58 percent in 2010. Hispanics, the fastest growing sector, grew to 27 percent from 22 percent ten years earlier. Floridians who are non-Hispanic African Americans decreased to 14.5 percent from 15.2 percent, and Asian-Americans increased to 3 percent from 2.4 percent. 

Voter registration trends show that Florida is not easily pigeonholed into a red or blue niche, despite the outcomes of recent elections. More than one-third of the state’s registered voters are now non-white. The largest segment of Latinos remains Cuban-Americans who have overwhelmingly voted Republican since the first émigrés arrived in Miami in the 1960s. But Puerto Ricans, the second largest group, are more likely to vote Democratic. Indeed, the majority of Florida’s Hispanics are now registered as Democrats or independents, according to the James Madison Institute.

More people aged 60 to 69 moved to Florida than any other age cohort over the last decade. However, those aged 18 to 53 now outnumber Boomers in Florida. More and more of these younger voters are registering as “No Party Affiliation,” which helps to make independents the fastest growing group of Florida voters. Unaffiliated voters constitute 27 percent of registered voters while Republicans make up 37 percent and Democrats 33 percent.

Florida had some of the nation’s closest election outcomes in 2018 – a governor’s race DeSantis won by only 0.4 percent and a Senate race fellow Republican Rick Scott won by a mere 0.12 percent. However, the Covid pandemic contributed to a surge in Republican voters when DeSantis’s stand against lockdowns and other restrictions drew supporters from across the country. As DeSantis moved Florida further to the right on issues ranging from abortion to higher education, he also helped to bring into the GOP some long-time residents, particularly in North Florida who had regularly voted Democratic

Voter Suppression

Anxiety about the fragility of Republican victories as well as hopes of securing his party’s presidential nomination may have led Gov. Ron DeSantis to introduce strict voting control measures in 2021, which the Republican-led legislature speedily enacted. Law SB 90 limits where drop boxes for ballots can be placed, and it requires that the boxes be staffed during hours of operation. The law also restricts who can drop off a ballot for someone else, limiting this role to family members and caregivers, a change that voting rights advocates say places burdens on the disabled and seniors. Voters are also required to provide photo ID, a demand that the late Rep. John Lewis once likened to “a new poll tax.”

DeSantis and others claimed that they were tightening voting laws to combat voting fraud. However, a 2023 Brookings Institution report concluded:

“In Florida, there were nine cases of election fraud between the 2020 and 2022 elections but many of those involved individuals who were confused over whether or not they had the right to vote.”

Despite lack of evidence of any significant voter fraud, DeSantis signed a law in April 2022 that established a new state security office to investigate claims of voter fraud and arrest those charged with it. The new “election police force” ended up arresting only about 20 people in 2022 for casting illegal ballots. Nearly all those accused were shown to lack criminal intent and their cases were eventually dropped.

These arrests stirred fears in some voters that they might be apprehended for voting in error. Many of these citizens were former felons whose right to vote was restored in 2018 by an amendment to the Florida Constitution that 65 percent of voters approved. Nonetheless, DeSantis and the legislature have undermined the amendment by enacting a law that prohibits former felons from regaining their right to vote unless they have paid off fines imposed by the courts as part of their conviction. 

The Brennan Center and other voting rights groups challenged this law as unconstitutional, but the US Eleventh Circuit Court has allowed it to remain in place. In the 2024 election cycle an estimated 935,000 Floridians who have completed their sentences but not paid their fines will be unable to vote, according to the Sentencing Project.

Redistricting

DeSantis and the Florida legislature have also drawn fire for enacting a 2022 redistricting map for Congressional districts that voting and civil rights advocacy groups say is racially discriminatory. The reconfigured maps, they argued after the 2022 election, were designed to ensure the defeat of three-term Rep. Al Lawson, a Black Democrat, as well as to dilute the power of Black voters in other districts by moving many of them into overwhelmingly white and conservative districts. Their challenge wended its way through the courts until February of this year, when the Florida Supreme Court issued a one-sentence order saying that it would not speed up consideration of the case in time for the 2024 election. The contested maps will remain in place.

Voter Registration Obstacles

Law SB 7050, which allowed DeSantis to run for president without having to resign as governor, also builds on the changes to Florida election law enacted in 2021. The latest law imposes stringent new requirements on third-party voter registration organizations and quintuples the maximum fines these groups can incur. The measure bars non-citizens from handling or collecting voter applications as part of an effort by a third-party group to register voters. The new restraints have drawn the ire of Hispanic and Black voter advocacy groups, which argued that non-white voters often rely on their organizations to help them register.

Increasing the obstacles to mail-in voting, the new law mandates that voters can pick up a mail-in ballot only if they are unable to vote in person at an early voting location or at their assigned polling place on Election Day. Only family members can now request a mail-in ballot on behalf of a voter. 

Finally, critics of SB 7050 maintain that the new law will cause more registered voters to be purged from the rolls. Election officials can decide to remove a voter based on any “official” source rather than relying solely on ID sources specified in existing law. The new law also accelerates the process of removing voters from the rolls. 

Outraged by these new rules, the NAACP, the League of Women Voters, the ACLU and other voting advocacy groups filed two separate lawsuits. The League of Women Voters in Florida said in a statement released the day DeSantis signed the bill:

“The law, Senate Bill 7050, directly targets and drastically restricts the ability of nonpartisan civic engagement organizations, like the League of Women Voters of Florida, to engage with voters, violating their right to freedom of speech and association.”

On March 1 Obama-appointed Chief US District Judge Mark E. Walker struck down the provision in the law that prevents non-citizens from collecting or handling voter registration applications on behalf of third-party organizations. Judge Walker ruled that the prohibition violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. However, Judge Walker’s decision only prohibits Florida’ secretary of state from enforcing that part of the law; he did not prevent the state’s attorney general from applying it. A second trial is now underway in Tallahassee before Judge Walker in which voting rights organizations seek to extend that prohibition on enforcement to the state attorney general as well.

Voter registration advocates who argue that SB 7050’s restrictions and penalties have already depressed 2024 voter registration drives continue to face challenges in overturning the measure. After Judge Walker’s ruling, Florida officials appealed to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Tallahassee. That case is still pending.

Abortion Rights

In recent weeks the Supreme Court judges, all appointed by Republican governors, have played a pivotal role in the fight over abortion rights. The Florida State legislature passed several bills in 2023 that affect reproductive freedom, including the Heartbeat Protection Act that restricts access to abortion after six weeks’ gestation. The controversial legislation prompted a grassroots effort to mount a ballot initiative to amend the constitution, which garnered almost a million signatures. Proposed Amendment 4 to the Florida State constitution would preserve the right to abortion until 24 weeks. The Florida Supreme Court allowed the six-week ban to go into effect and approved the final language of the ballot initiative on April 1.

For the amendment to become part of the constitution, 60% of voters must approve it. Backers of the proposed amendment include Floridians Protecting Freedom, Planned Parenthood, League of Women Voters Florida and  the SEIU (Service Employees International Union). Florida Voice for the Unborn and Florida Council of Catholic Bishops are among opponents to the proposal. Of note, this amendment may not settle the issue as Florida Supreme Court justices have signaled a willingness to separately consider  the issue of fetal rights.Down-ballot primaries in August will also provide an opportunity for voters to learn the national and state candidates’ positions on a host of issues affecting reproductive freedom, including access to gender-affirming care, bathrooms and in vitro fertilization. 

Important Down Ballot Races

While the presidential election will be at the forefront this November, Florida has a number of down ballot races that could also affect the nation as well. Democrats will select a candidate in the August 20th Florida primary to challenge Republican Rick Scott, the former governor who was elected to the Senate in 2018. Scott is regarded as one of the most vulnerable Senate incumbents in this election cycle in part because of his stance on Social Security, Medicare and abortion. Twenty-eight House seats will also be up for grabs, including a new one awarded to Florida after the 2020 Census. Finally, Floridians will have the chance to vote on Amendment 3 to the state constitution, which would legalize the use of marijuana for adults 21 and older.

Get Out the Vote

What role can you play? Take part in this election by registering voters, phone banking and canvassing. Sign up as a poll worker. Help cure mail-in ballots to prevent a ballot from being discarded because of an error that could easily be fixed.

Florida lawyers can lend their skills to organizations like Florida Election Protection Coalition that aids voters who find their right to vote challenged at the polls.  Lawyers can also help assess accessibility at polls before voting occurs.

These organizations are also playing an active part in working for free and fair elections in Florida:

League of Women Voters of Florida “registers, empowers, and educates voters” as well as advocates for fair voting laws.

Common Cause Florida advocates for fair voting laws and helps voters with individual questions. Both Common Cause and America Votes helped cure Florida mail-in ballots in the 2020 election.

Black Voters Matter works in Florida and 24 other states to register voters and get them to the polls. Their “We Fight Back” bus tour is headed to Florida May 16 to May 20. 

Movement Voter Fund helps support Florida voter organizations that focus on Latinos. 

Equality Florida focuses on the LGBTQ community to register, educate, and transport voters to the polls.

The Andrew Goodman Foundation seeks to increase voter registration among college students and inspire them to get out the vote.

The Florida Justice Center helps former felons regain their right to vote.

Written by Marilyn Go (voting) and Vivian Lewis (reproductive freedom);

Edited by Jim Harbison and Jacki Swearingen

Although frequently described as a bellwether state, Michigan had also held the dubious reputation of being one of the most gerrymandered states in the country.[1] However, since 2018, Michigan has been in the forefront of protecting voter rights, as well as reproductive freedom. As discussed below, after voters established an independent redistricting commission, Michigan joined three other states in attempting to end partisan gerrymandering and create competitive elections with the drawing of fair maps.  

Demographics. Michigan has experienced slow growth since its heyday as the automotive capital of the United States after World War II. After the 2010 Census reported that the state population had decreased from the prior Census, Michigan 's population then grew by less than 2% the following decade. With a population of 10,077,331, as reported in the 2020 Census, Michigan's rank dropped from eighth to tenth most populous state in the country. The population of Michigan has been predominantly Non-Hispanic White, at 76.67%, but the number and percentage of this group has been declining the past few decades. In 2022, the percentage of NH Whites was 74%., while the percentage of Blacks was 14.1%, Hispanic 5.7%, and Asians 3.5%. 

However, Census classifications may be too general to capture the diversity within certain groups. Michigan is home to an estimated 400,000 to 490,000 Arabs, a widely varying estimate since Arabs are not separately counted by the Census Bureau. Arab voters are concentrated in major cities and have a voice in Michigan politics.  In 2018, Rashida Tlaib, from the Detroit area, became the first Palestinian American elected to Congress and in 2021, voters in Dearborn, which is over 40% Arab, elected their first Arab (Lebanese American) mayor. In Michigan’s recent Presidential primary election, over 100,000 voters selected "Uncommitted" to express opposition to President Biden's handling of the Gaza conflict.

Independent Redistricting Commission.  In 2018, Michigan voters passed, with over 61% of the vote, a ballot initiative approving a constitutional amendment establishing an independent redistricting commission to redraw congressional and state legislative districts. The 13-member Michigan Independent Citizens Redistricting (MICR) Commission that was created consists of four Democrats, four Republicans and five independents randomly selected from 9,300 voters who had applied.[2] 

After completion of the 2020 United States Census, the MICR released draft-proposed Congressional maps in December 2021, which the MICR approved with a vote of 8 to 5 and, later, added approved state legislative maps. The Congressional maps drawn by the MICR were hailed by many as being fair, creating more competition, and no longer heavily favoring Republicans. The Republicans, who had controlled redistricting after the 2010 Census, had previously drawn maps with "impregnable majorities”in the Legislature. Michigan is one of four states to create a truly nonpartisan independent commission to draw Congressional maps in 2022. California, Arizona, and Colorado are the others. 

Federal Court Challenge to Maps Drawn. However, shortly after release of the maps, a group of Black Michigan voters filed a federal lawsuit in 2022 claiming that the Congressional maps violated both the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. The plaintiffs asserted that  various legislative districts in and around Detroit were racial gerrymanders and diluted Black voting strength by eliminating or greatly diminishing the majority-minority districts there.  

On December 21, 2023, the three-judge court that was convened to hear the case agreed with the plaintiffs. The Court found that the record "overwhelmingly" showed that the MICR drew the "plaintiffs’ districts predominantly on the basis of race" in a manner which violated the plaintiffs' rights under the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The three-judge court similarly found in a related case that maps for more than a dozen Michigan state House and Senate districts around metro Detroit violated the U.S. Constitution by splitting Detroit into districts combined with whiter suburbs. The court enjoined the use of the districts as drawn and directed that new maps be drawn, released for public comment, and submitted to the Court for review by March 1, 2024.[3] The state's application for stay was denied by the Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh on January 22, 2024. 

New maps have been submitted in accordance with the schedule set and are now before the court and its experts for review.   

The need to have maps redrawn is troubling. As recounted in the December 21 decision, the Commissioners simply failed to understand the requirements of the Voting Rights Act. That  should not have happened and could have easily been avoided.In addition, two of the Commissioners resigned prior to completion of their duties, because they lived outside of the state; this is a straightforward matter that should have been disclosed and uncovered prior to the time they assumed their positions. 

Michigan’s experience shows how an independent nonpartisan redistricting commission can end partisan gerrymandering and create competitive electoral races by drawing fair maps.  However, the pending lawsuits over redistricting illustrate the complexities of redistricting and the many different interests that must be considered in drawing maps. Concerns over partisan gerrymandering cannot supersede legal obligations under the Voting Rights Act, which ensures that historically politically disadvantaged groups have representation. 

Other Voting Legislation. This past November, Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer signed into law a series of election bills to increase voter participation and provide for broader access. One measure to expand voter registration included expansion of automatic voter registration to incarcerated people after their release. Michigan had already previously allowed people with felony convictions to regain their voting rights once they're out of prison.

The state legislature also passed bills designed to prevent "chaos," particularly in the event of disputed elections. Among other things, these laws criminalize poll worker intimidation, regulate political ads that use artificial intelligence and tighten the election certification process that former President Trump tried to disrupt following his 2020 election loss.

Political Landscape of Michigan. Michigan is considered a competitive battleground state in Presidential elections.  The Democratic Presidential candidate has, since 1992, prevailed in Michigan, except in 2016 when former President Trump won with a small margin of 11,000.  Although President Biden defeated Trump in 2020 by a larger margin, he prevailed by making inroads in the suburbs, adding to his advantage in the cities, which are traditional Democratic strongholds.

As a result of a less than two percent increase in population since the 2010 census, as compared to the average 8% increase nationwide, Michigan lost one seat in Congress and will now have 13 Representatives. This was the fifth consecutive time that Michigan lost a House seat following a Census, a change accompanying the shrinkage of the automotive industry there and decentralization in the manufacture of automotive accessories and parts.

In 2022, voters elected seven Democrats and six Republicans to the U.S. House of Representatives. However, Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D) is now running for the Senate seat vacated by Debbie Stabenow, a Democrat who is retiring. Until redistricting maps are finalized, it is not yet clear which Representatives are running for re-election in what districts. 

Until the use of the newly drawn maps in 2022, the Michigan state legislature was dominated by Republicans who were in control for over a decade and effectively maintained control through redistricting.  Like the prior Congressional map drawn before creation of the MICR, the state legislative maps combined urban areas, which tended to vote Democratic, with surrounding suburbs, which tended to be more Republican.  The 2022 electoral districts, which were based on maps drawn following  criteria in the 2018 amendment to the State Constitution, the number of state Representatives who were Democrats increased from 53 to 56, while the number of Republican Representatives dropped from 56 to 54.  Due to unfilled vacancies resulting from retirement or death, the number of representatives is currently tied at 54 to 54.  The Democrats currently hold a small majority in the state Senate.

Reproductive Freedom.  Reproductive freedom has been a potent issue in Michigan where voters approved a state constitutional amendment to ensure abortion rights in 2022.  The amendment included all matters related to pregnancy, including, but not limited to, pregnancy, abortion care, contraception, and infertility.  Governor Whitmer, whose support of the amendment helped her win re-election, subsequently signed a series of legislation protecting reproductive freedom, including legislation that repeals a law requiring women to have a separate insurance rider to pay for abortion, as well as laws that imposed onerous and unnecessary non-medical requirements on abortion clinics designed to force them to close, raising costs for patients, and restricting access to abortion.  She has also issued an executive order protecting Michigan healthcare workers from extradition for providing IVF services or pregnancy terminations.

Saying voting rights are “how we secure reprod­uctive rights,” Whitmer noted that some in Congress favor a national abortion ban and urged voters to stay engaged for the upcoming election. There is a congressional proposal, the Life at Conception Act , with 125 cosponsors that would ban nearly all abortions. Although IVF is not mentioned, the proposed legislation uses an argument similar to that of the Alabama Supreme Court, which conferred personhood on frozen embryos. With IVF emerging as another reproductive freedom issue, Michigan politicians of both parties have been working to refine their positions.

Although the filing deadline for candidates in Michigan’s August primary election is April 23, polling already suggests that reproductive freedom will continue to be an issue. With months to go, Michigan voters who care about reproductive freedom have plenty of time to learn more.

Volunteering Opportunites. We encourage all, particularly those living in Michigan, to support or volunteer at organizations that will assist voters in Michigan, including the following:

• Promote the Vote – coalition of Michigan-based groups helping voters in historically disenfranchised communities to vote.  https://www.michiganvoting.org/
• Voting Access For All – coalition of organizations focused on helping people to vote, particularly those who had been incarcerated.  https://votingaccessforall.org/
• Michigan Fair Elections – coalition of organizations and groups working to support free and fair elections in Michigan.   https://www.mifairelections.org/
• NextGen America – Michigan’s branch of the nation’s largest youth voter organization working to register and mobilize young people to vote. https://organizing.nextgenamerica.org/state/michigan/ 

[1]See, e.g., Laura Royden and Michael Li, "Extreme Maps,"https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/extreme-maps.

[2]https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2021/03/28/how-michigans-redistricting-process-work-and-how-get-involved/4700107001/.  

[3]  See Agee v. Benson,https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/W.D.-Mich.-22-cv-00272-dckt-000131_000-filed-2023-12-21.pdf (Dec. 21, 2023 decision).

By Ryan O’Connell

Edited by Marilyn Go, Jim Harbison, and Jacki Swearingen

Updated 2.6.2024

With its robust economy, Georgia has grown rapidly, attracting a large influx of new residents from other states. These waves of in-migration have profoundly changed the state’s political make-up over the last two decades because most of the newcomers are African American.  Many of them hold college degrees and are affluent; the largest group has moved from New York State.  Georgia’s Latino and Asian-American communities, while smaller, have also grown significantly.

All three groups lean heavily Democratic, and their growth has turned Georgia from deep red into a battleground state. The number of eligible voters in Georgia has jumped 30% over the last 20 years, and Black Americans represent half of that increase. Meanwhile, whites constitute only about a quarter of new voters.

Latinos and Asian Americans represent a relatively small slice of the Georgia electorate. However, their numbers have increased significantly; they account for 14% and 8%, respectively, of the growth in the voters since 2010. Hispanic voters increased by 235% and Asians by 245%, compared to 59% for Blacks and 12% for whites. (Black Latino and Asian Americans have been key to Georgia's registered voter growth since 2016).

Source: Pew Research

These shifts have radically altered the state’s demographic and political mix. In 2000, white voters overwhelmingly dominated the electorate, representing almost 70% of potential voters.  However, over the next 20 years, white voters’ share dropped by 11 points to 58%. Black Americans’ share rose five points, to 33% of all eligible voters. Hispanics and Asian Americans’ shares increased more modestly, to 5% and 3% of eligible voters. 

In total, the three minority groups rose to over 40% from about 30% of eligible voters over those ten years.  While white voters grew modestly, to 4.4 million from 4 million, minority voters shot up to 3 million from 1.7 million. This trend has created the potential for a significant shift in the balance of power between whites and minorities in Georgia.   

Source: Pew Research

Voters in the metropolitan Atlanta region, which is mostly Democratic, now represent 54% of the state’s voters. Other metropolitan areas such as Savannah, Macon, and Augusta also lean Democratic.

In 2018, Stacey Abrams, a Black woman, came very close to winning the race for governor.  Then, in 2020, a political earthquake shook Georgia, as a Democratic Presidential candidate won the state for the first time since Bill Clinton carried it in 1992.  Georgians also elected two Democrats as Senators, one of whom, Raphael Warnock, is African American.

A History of Gerrymandering and Voter Suppression

On the surface, Georgia, a state with a long history of voter suppression, seemed to embrace multiracial democracy at last.  But the reality is far different; old habits die hard.

Georgia is a highly gerrymandered state, and state officials continue to use numerous techniques to diminish the power of minority voters. The state is probably balanced between Democratic and Republican voters at this point. Nonetheless, Republicans hold about 60% of state Senate seats and state House seats. Georgia’s Congressional delegation is also lop-sided, with nine Republican-controlled districts and only five Democratic-controlled ones. 

Federal Judge Ordered Georgia to Redraw Maps

In October 2023, a federal district judge in Atlanta ruled that Georgia’s electoral maps violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by diluting the power of Black voters. Judge Steve C. Jones of the Northern District of Georgia ordered the state legislature to redraw the maps for state and Congressional districts. The legislature did so at a special session beginning November 29, and Governor Kemp signed new electoral maps into law on December 8.

The new maps created an additional majority Black congressional district, as the judge ordered.  However, Democrats and Black voters who had brought this case (as well as two other lawsuits challenging State Senate and House maps) objected to the new maps. They criticized the congressional maps for shifting Lucy McBath, a Democratic congresswoman, into a mostly Republican district. Nonetheless, Judge Jones ruled that the redrawn maps complied with the Voting Rights Act and his previous order that an additional majority Black district be created (Georgia Republicans Add Majority-Black Congressional District at Expense of McBath). 

Judge Jones observed that “redistricting decisions by a legislative body with an eye toward securing partisan advantage do not alone ’violate’ the Voting Rights Act. On this issue, Judge Jones cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in Rucho v. Common Cause (2019) that disputes regarding possible partisan gerrymandering (as opposed to racially based gerrymandering) are not within the purview of Federal courts.

Under the revised maps, Republicans are likely to maintain their 9-5 majority in Georgia’s congressional delegation.

African Americans are severely under-represented in government on the county level. The deck is stacked against them because of electoral practices and the legislature’s “unprecedented efforts to intervene in local redistricting,” according to the Brennan Center for Law and Justice at New York University (Local Lockout in Georgia).   

Large Voter Purges                                            

While Brian Kemp was Secretary of State and preparing to run for Governor, he purged 1.4 million citizens from Georgia’s voter rolls over the course of eight years.  In 2017 alone, Kemp removed 750,000 people from the rolls, knowing that Stacey Abrams would run against him for Governor in 2018.

Some of the purges may have been routine, but many of those disproportionately eliminated were Black voters. The purges may have been an important factor in the gubernatorial race, which Abrams lost by only 55,000 votes. 

New Voting Law Targets Minorities, City Dwellers

The 2020 election triggered a strong counter-reaction in Georgia. In March 2021, the Republican-dominated state legislature pushed through a bill in record time that was designed to suppress the votes of minorities and urban Democrats. The Republicans called the bill, SB 202, an “election integrity law”, even though state audits determined there was virtually no fraud in the 2020 election.

The new law made registering to vote and voting more difficult, particularly for minorities and city-dwellers, by:    

• Imposing tougher voter ID requirements
• Restricting the availability of mail-in ballots and shortening the deadlines for submitting them
• Reducing the number of drop-off boxes for mail-in ballots in Atlanta and other cities
• Cutting back the hours for using drop-off boxes
• Prohibiting the use of mobile voting buses
• Allowing private citizens to file an unlimited number of challenges to voters’ registrations
• Banning anyone except poll workers from handing out water and food to voters standing in line

Why the last prohibition? Voters in Atlanta, especially in mostly Black neighborhoods, often must wait for hours in the blazing Georgia heat to cast their votes.  The legislature clearly intended to discourage these minority citizens from casting their votes. 

Before the 2020 election, Georgia’s Secretary of State supervised most aspects of elections, including tabulating votes and resolving disputes about voting.  Secretary Brad Raffensberger, a Republican, discharged his duties honorably and refused Donald Trump’s request that he “find 11,720 votes” to swing the election in Trump’s favor. 

Frivolous Challenges to Voters’ Registrations

However, In SB 202, the legislature drastically cut back the Secretary’s authority over elections and created opportunities for other elected officials to intervene in election disputes. The Secretary of State is no longer the head of the State Election Commission.  Instead, Georgia legislators appoint the chair of the commission.  These changes could allow interference by partisan actors in contested elections.  

Activists have abused their new power to challenge voter registrations under SB 202.  A handful of conservative activists--six--filed a total of 100,000 challenges in 2022, according to ProPublica (Close to 100,000 Voter Registrations Were Challenged in Georgia). Many of the challenges were frivolous and poorly researched. 

These challenges have been used to harass and intimidate voters.  Furthermore, election officials have complained that they must spend a great deal of time reviewing the challenges, which often contain factual errors or focus on minor deficiencies. 

New Law May Facilitate Challenging Voters

In February the state legislature passed Senate Bill 189, which defines several probable causes for removing voters from the rolls: death, voting or registering in another jurisdiction, a tax exemption indicating a primary residence elsewhere, or a non-residential address.  The bill has gone to Gov. Brian Kemp for his signature or veto.  

Although some of these measures my seem reasonable on the surface, the American Civil Liberties Union has threatened to sue the governor if he signs the bill.  The ACLU and other voting rights organizations have attacked SB 189 on the grounds that the law will make it easier to file challenges to voters, by allowing various deficiencies --the “probable causes” listed above--to disqualify voters.   They also object to a provision that allows challenges to rely partly on a voter’s presence on the National Address Change (NAC) database, which the U.S. Postal Service maintains.  

These critics argue that the NAC database is often inaccurate, and they note that the individuals who mounted the 100,000 challenges frequently rely on the database to support their challenges.   In addition, under the new law homeless people must use the county voter registration office as their address instead of where they live. Opponents say that could make it harder for homeless citizens to cast ballots because their registered polling place might be far away.

Republicans argue that the law is needed to deter voter fraud, even though there is no evidence of any significant problems in Georgia.  

One provision might deter some challenges.  Under SB 189, a voter’s presence on the NAC database, by itself, is “insufficient cause” unless there is “additional evidence” that a voter’s address has changed. 

What Can You Do? 

Whether you live in Georgia or not, you can help to make Georgia’s elections fairer, despite the obstacles created by the legislatures.  

First, if Gov. Kemp has not yet signed SB 189 into law, you can write him asking him to veto the measure.  It’s a long shot, but worth trying. 

Helping Georgians to register to vote and monitoring polls are two particularly important ways to help.    

The primaries for state and Congressional races will take place on May 21. Early voting for those races will begin on April 29 and last until May 17.  

You can volunteer to monitor polls, monitor social media, and contact voters who need information and support.  You can fill the last two roles on a remote basis.  Get in touch with Common Cause Georgia (https://www.commoncause.org/georgia; 404-524-4598). 

If you are a lawyer or a paralegal, you can volunteer for Election Protection (https://866ourvote.org/volunteer), which provides advice to citizens who want to register to vote or who may encounter problems when they try to vote.  If you have a relative in law school, ask him or her to volunteer.  You can work from your office or home. EP provides training and materials on each state’s election laws and procedures. 

You can also volunteer to serve as a poll monitor with EP, if you are not a lawyer. 

Election Protection operates under the auspices of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, a civil rights organization, and it has about 100 partners, including Common Cause. 

The Brennan Center has outlined several steps that Georgia and other swing states should take to ensure that their 2024 elections are conducted fairly and smoothly (Are Swing States Ready for 2024).

Written by Jim Harbison; edited by Marilyn Go, Ryan O’Connell and Jacki Swearingen 

In our recent articles, we have focused on voting rights issues in the battleground states that may be key to the outcome of the 2024 Presidential Election.  We have covered developments, some of them adverse, in Georgia, Ohio, North Carolina, and Virginia. This month we turn to Pennsylvania, where the outlook for fair elections is more promising. 

Courts have often played an important role in the protection of voting rights and fair elections.  As a result, judicial elections have become significant contests in the struggle over voting rights. In the November 2022 elections, when Dan McCaffery won his race to become a Pennsylvania State Supreme Court Justice, the Court swung to a 5-2 Democratic majority. Had the Republican candidate won, the Democratic majority would have remained 4-3.  Given the stakes, out-of-state political groups funneled large amounts of money into the race. 

Election-reform advocates hailed McCaffery’s election as an important defense against potential gerrymandering and limitations of voters’ rights in the state.  To understand why, we need to review some of the history of gerrymandering in Pennsylvania, a state that is split nearly 50-50 between Republicans and Democrats.  The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has blocked repeated efforts to create highly gerrymandered electoral districts. 

In the 2010 elections, a small group within the Republican Party launched Project REDMAP (short for Redistricting Majority Project), a targeted effort to fund key state election races across the country and gain control of state legislatures.  Their data-driven, computerized approach succeeded, and it shifted the balance of power in numerous state governments, including Pennsylvania. 

The Republicans won the Pennsylvania state House (previously Democratic-controlled) and the governorship, while retaining their majority in the state Senate.  With this “trifecta” control, the Legislature drew redistricting maps in 2011 following the 2010 census that were extremely favorable to Republicans.  One of the districts drawn was called one of the most gerrymandered districts in the country and was characterized as Goofy kicking Donald Duck.  https://www.cbsnews.com/news/drawing-the-lines-on-gerrymandering/.  The Republican governor, unsurprisingly, did not veto the maps.

The maps were used until a lawsuit was filed claiming the maps were gerrymandered.  The case reached the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in late 2017.  On January 22, 2018, the Court held that the maps drawn “clearly, plainly and palpably violate the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania” as partisan gerrymandering.  The Court ordered that new maps be submitted to it by February 15, 2018.  In a 138-page order issued on February 7, 2018, the Supreme Court provided detailed criteria for the Legislature to use in redrawing maps.  

Despite the Court’s directions, the Legislature failed to draw fairer maps in a timely fashion.  The Court then selected an outside expert to create more balanced maps, which were implemented.  In the 2018 general election, the number of Republicans and Democrats in the state’s Congressional delegation, which had been a lopsided 13-5 in the last three general elections, swung to an even 9-9.  The new, balanced delegation was much more in line with the even split among Pennsylvanian voters.

Dissatisfied with the State Supreme Court rulings, Republican lawmakers then attempted to change the system for electing justices.  Previously, candidates ran on a statewide basis. However, the legislators sought to have judges elected from specific voting districts, even though justices on the Supreme Court have the duty to interpret the law for the entire state and do not represent a particular district’s constituents. Observers noted that some of the proposed districts were heavily Republican and suggested the intent was to change the Court’s composition.

Such a change is only possible by amending the PA State Constitution, which would require making it a state ballot initiative.  To do so requires passage of such a measure by a 66.67% legislative majority or passage  in two successive legislative sessions by a 50% majority.  The bill was passed by the PA House and Senate by 50.5% and 52.0%, respectively, in the 2019-20 session, but failed to garner enough of a majority to allow it to come up for a vote in the 2021-22 session, in which the Democrats controlled the House, and the measure died.   

In August 2023, the State Supreme Court issued a significant decision upholding Pennsylvania's expansion of mail-in voting in 2019, affirming another measure in favor of voting rights.

After the 2020 census results, in a required redistricting made more substantial because the number of Pennsylvania’s Congressional seats had declined from 18 to 17, the Legislature again revised the electoral maps.  The Republican-controlled House and Senate created a highly gerrymandered set of districts.  However, this time the governor, a Democrat, vetoed the legislation to implement the maps.  This impasse brought the dispute over redistricting before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court again. 

The Court ruled that the districts were overly partisan and appointed an expert to create fairer ones.  In the 2022 election, with these new district lines in place, the Congressional allocation for Pennsylvania remained balanced, with eight Republicans and nine Democrats.  Furthermore, the State legislature shifted to a Democratic majority, but by just one representative. Meanwhile, the Senate remained in Republican hands. 

Although election reforms to expand voter access and protect the integrity of local election officials may be too slow in coming for some, this past September the progressive Democratic governor, Josh Shapiro, simplified automatic voter registration for Pennsylvanians when they obtain or renew a driver's license. 

So, all in all, in Pennsylvania the prospects look encouraging for taking a balanced approach to protecting the right to vote and not instituting some of the new restrictions adopted in other battleground states like Wisconsin and Georgia.  In the short term, courts have ensured that the districting process in Pennsylvania is fair. 

Nonetheless, in the long run, having a truly independent commission draw the district lines, following the California approach, would be far superior, as we discuss in our Gerrymandering Primer. Common Cause gives Pennsylvania’s redistricting process a C+ rating because of this structural flaw in the system.

What is essential for classmates who reside in Pennsylvania is to remain vigilant and follow developments in the run-up to the 2024 election. There are still many politicians who, if left unchecked, would seek to enact legislation limiting voting access. 

As you may remember, Pennsylvania was one of the states where there were sustained attempts to invalidate the 2020 Presidential election results through political maneuvers and frivolous lawsuits. The Brennan Center for Law and Justice at New York University provides a list  and in-depth analysis of current challenges to election rights in the state.

Watch for developments in two key areas: 

• Decisions on whether ballot curing is allowed, which is still being contested in the courts.  One particular case to follow is the ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Paradise Baxter in  November 2023, which held that mailed-in ballots that arrive on time, but in envelopes without dates handwritten by Pennsylvania voters, should be counted. The decision is likely to be appealed, probably all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.
• Legislative attempts to speed up the counting of absentee ballots, such as by allowing outer envelopes that can be opened ahead of election day.  One such legislative proposal failed to pass in April.    

As you may recall, Pennsylvania’s slow ballot counting created a great deal of confusion in the 2020 election, which election deniers seized upon as support for their unfounded claims of fraud.   

 Pennsylvania is truly an example of our democracy at risk, and we must make sure that the right to vote, particularly the use of mail-in ballots, is protected.

Edited by Ryan O’Connell ‘73, Jim Harbison ‘73, and Marilyn Go ‘73

As anxieties grow for the 2024 Presidential elections, Virginia voters are preparing for a state legislature election next month observers have deemed a “bellwether.” The outcome not only will determine who controls Virginia’s House of Delegates and Senate, but also the fate of the state’s policies on abortion, gun control and climate change. In addition, winning Republican majorities in both chambers could jump-start the presidential campaign of Governor Glen Youngkin as a possible GOP alternative to Donald Trump.

This November all 140 seats in Virginia’s legislature will be up for grabs. The Republicans have a four-seat majority in the House of Delegates as well as the governorship. Democrats, who won the Senate in 2019, hold a two-seat majority that has allowed them to stop Republican efforts to weaken abortion rights and impose restrictions on some voters. This past August the Democrats’ majority in the Senate also enabled them to halt Youngkin’s proposal that would reduce taxes on corporations and high income individuals.

If the Democrats lose the Virginia Senate this fall, Republicans will have a “trifecta” that will allow them to limit or even ban abortion rights and to overturn the gun control measures like background checks that Democrats established in 2020. In contrast, winning both the upper chamber and the House of Delegates would give Democrats new leverage in budget negotiations with the state’s Republican governor.

If Republicans retake the Senate and hold onto the House of Delegates, Youngkin and GOP legislators would have the ability to enact previously unsuccessful legislation to oppose Medicaid expansion, to allow religious organizations to deny services to LGBTQ citizens, and to eliminate strict emissions controls. Republicans need to win only one additional seat to tie the Senate, an outcome that would permit the Republican lieutenant governor to cast a tie breaker vote.

The struggle for the Virginia legislature is likely to come down to a handful of toss up districts, most of them in the suburbs surrounding Washington D.C. as well as in Richmond and Hampton Roads. Five races in the Senate and nine in the House of Delegates could affect the fate of key issues like abortion on a national as well as state level.

Ten senators and 17 delegates have retired, due largely to a radical reshaping of the electoral districts that was launched by a bipartisan election commission in 2021 to counter partisan gerrymandering. When the maps put forth by that panel failed to win the legislature’s approval, a requirement, the redistricting map was sent to the state Supreme Court for review. The judges appointed an independent special master, who drew up new districts that pitted several incumbents against each other.

Just as in recent contests in Wisconsin and Kansas, Democrats are focusing on what the loss of both Virginia chambers would mean for abortion rights. Virginia currently permits abortion through about 26 weeks, the longest period in any southern state since the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Gov. Youngkin has said that legislating a prohibition on abortion at 15 weeks, with exceptions only for rape, incest, and the life of the mother, is a priority for him. Democrats fear that if they lose the Senate, he and Republican legislators will impose a more severe ban that resembles those of Texas and Florida. In fact, Youngkin was caught on tape during his 2021 campaign telling a supporter that he favored a stricter ban but needed to moderate his comments to win independent voters. 

Democrats also point to Youngkin’s actions to curb voting rights as an indication that the Republicans would impose even more restrictions if they won both chambers of the legislature. In April the governor reversed Virginia’s policy of automatically restoring voting rights to former felons after they completed their sentences. Former felons can now only have that right restored by the governor’s authorization. And in May, Youngkin’s chief election officer removed Virginia from a multi-state data system designed to keep voter rolls up to date, making it harder for election officials to reach out to eligible voters and encourage them to register.

Educational issues loom large in next month’s election as well. In July Youngkin put in place a K-12 transgender policy that requires, among other measures, that students be addressed with the pronoun for the sex assigned to them at birth. Republican legislators have tried previously to ban transgender athletes and to prohibit the teaching of “inherently divisive subjects.” They have also pushed to allow families to use public funds to pay for private education.

Fueled by rising prejudice nationwide against LGBTQ people and parental dissatisfaction over pandemic mandates like school closings, school board meetings in northern Virginia counties like Loudon and Fairfax have grown contentious in recent years. Parents on the right also railed against history curricula that included slavery and the civil rights movement being taught in public schools, erroneously labeling books or lessons with those subjects “critical race theory.” With school board seats across the state on the ballot this November, these fights are likely to shape legislative contests as well.

County contests for sheriffs, commonwealth’s attorneys, and superintendents touch on local issues like development, crime, and the rise of massive data centers that increase the use of fossil fuels and often leave local residents burdened with the financial and environmental costs. With Virginia’s five percent increase in crime during 2022, Republican candidates are calling to repeal Democratic changes in policing, like controls on racial profiling.

Recognizing the connection between these local contests and larger ones, both parties have worked to recruit candidates who can emerge as state and national leaders. Right-wing factions of the GOP have focused particularly on filling slots on school boards, a tactic that brings ideological struggles down to the grassroots level. Democratic activists have complained they lag behind in this latest fight because they were slow to catch on, just as they were in 2010 when Republicans began to concentrate on taking control of state legislatures.

With growing concerns that this upcoming election could determine the direction of Virginia’s policies and politics for years to come, both sides have stepped up fundraising efforts to make this potentially the most expensive midterm contest in the state’s history. Democratic candidates for both the House of Delegates and the Senate lead their Republican candidates in donations by a combined $15 million to $10.6 million for the period between July 1 and August 31. Republican hopes have been shored up by large sums coming from Youngkin’s Spirit of Virginia PAC, which took in $3.8 million during that period, with $1 million coming from Florida billionaire Thomas Peterffy.

The massive and small contributions to both parties will fund the canvassing and ad buys designed to drive the voter turnout key to victory in this election. Early voting began on September 22 and will run through 5:00 PM on November 4. Like his Democratic rivals, Youngkin is urging GOP voters to cast their ballots in advance at an early voting location. 

Registered voters in Virginia can also request a mail-in ballot before 5:00 pm on October 27. They can check their registration, locate their polling place and request an absentee ballot.

All voters need a valid driver’s license or other ID in order to vote in this critical election.

It is not too late to help register voters and facilitate voting for all citizens, regardless of political affiliation. Residents of Virginia as well as other states and the District of Columbia can volunteer for or contribute to one of the following non-partisan organizations:

The League of Women Voters protects and expands voting rights through advocacy and education. 

Virginia Legislative Elections Guide provides a nonpartisan guide to key votes. 

Virginia Civic Engagement Table supports non-profit organizations that assist at polling sites and provide voter protection hotlines. 

WorkElections recruits poll workers. 

VoteRiders offers Voter ID assistance. 

BigTentUSA gets out the vote through phone banking, post card writing, registration drives. 

BlackVotersMatter increases the voter engagement of Black citizens. Black Voters Matter is this year’s Justice Aid 2023 Grantee Partner. 

Rideshare2Vote increases voter turnout through providing transportation. 

See also other organizations listed in the Voting Activism Opportunities posted on the ClassAct HR '73 website.

By Marilyn Go, Jim Harbison, and Jacki Swearingen

Summer has not officially ended, so there is still time to squeeze in some reading about voting rights. This article contains a compilation of articles and other writings concerning redistricting, voting and related issues that may provide insight into the current and continuing challenges to protecting our democracy.

        This past June, the Supreme Court issued two significant decisions concerning voting rights and the protections under federal and state law. In Allen v. Milligan, the Court reaffirmed the  framework of the Voting Rights Act in holding that the Congressional map drawn by the Alabama legislature violated the Act. In Moore v. Harper, the court affirmed the authority of the North Carolina State Supreme Court to protect against gerrymandering in invalidating the "independent state legislature" theory that the legislature had the sole power to impose measures suppressing voter rights. The full impact of these decisions is yet to be determined.

•   The Significance of Allen v. Milligan, from the lawyer who argued the case, (6/23/2023)

•  Thanks to the Supreme Court, Elections Are Safe from at Least One Threat, (6/29/2023)

        Notwithstanding the Supreme Court directive in Allen and a prior decision in 2022, Alabama refused to comply when redrawing its maps.  Ultimately, a three-judge federal panel, perturbed by the open defiance of the state, appointed a special master to draw maps.  See Singleton v. Allen:

        •   Alabama Defies the Voting Rights Act, (noting that Louisiana was also flouting a court order to redraw maps).

•  Federal Court Blocks Alabama Congressional Map After Republican Lawmakers Defied U.S. Supreme Ct.

        In Florida, discriminatory redistricting maps were put into place by Governor DeSantis, who refused to adopt Congressional maps drawn by the state legislature controlled by Republican majorities. A state court judge recently found after a hearing that those maps violated the State Constitution by diminishing the ability of Black Floridians to elect a representative of their choice. Alabama and Florida have filed appeals, thereby preventing implementation of properly drawn maps before the next election. 

•   Alabama again appeals to S.Ct.

        •   Florida appeals a judge's ruling that struck down redistricting map pushed by DeSantis, (9/7/2023)

Challenges to redistricting maps have been brought in a number of other states. For example, in Georgia, there is a trial (ongoing as of September 11) involving claims that Congressional maps drawn violate the Voting Rights Act. In Wisconsin, a lawsuit was brought raising claims that redistricting maps, which include a number of districts that are not contiguous, are the product of extreme partisan redistricting.  That case has recently been countered with efforts to stop Justice Janet Protasiewicz (D), who was elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court this past  April by over 11% of the vote, from sitting and considering this case. 

•   Georgia redistricting trial opens with debate over federal requirements for Black representation.

  •   Wisconsin Republicans’ Nuclear Option, (9/12/2023).

  •   Fighting Partisan Gerrymandering in Wisconsin, (8/2/2023) 

        In addition, lawsuits have recently been brought challenging the validity and application of voting laws. For example, in Mississippi, a federal judge enjoined implementation of a new state law restricting the assistance that individuals and organizations could provide to Mississippi voters needing assistance due to disability, blindness, or inability to read or write. In July, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit struck down Mississippi's lifetime voting ban on persons convicted of felonies, including crimes having nothing to do with voting or governance, such as theft of timber or writing a bad check for $100. This law has prevented 10% of the voting population in Mississippi from voting and is similar to laws in 11 other states.

•   Federal Court Blocks Implementation of Mississippi’s New Voting Law

• Court Strikes Down Mississippi’s Lifetime Felony Voting Ban

In Florida, a federal court enjoined a recently enacted law that imposed a $50,000 fine on organizations who have non-citizens, including lawful permanent residents, assist in collecting or handling voter registration forms on the organization’s behalf.

•   Federal Court Blocks Florida Law that Targets Voter Registration, Civic Engagement, and Political Speech.

In North Carolina, the legislature passed an omnibus voting bill in June which, inter alia, that  limits the time period for sending mail-in ballots while increasing the time to challenge such ballots. The law also gives poll watchers the ability to move to listen to conversations between voters and election officials. On August 24, 2023, Governor Roy Cooper vetoed the bill, but the veto could be overridden by the legislature which is controlled by a supermajority of Republicans. 

•   Unpacking North Carolina Republicans’ Voter Suppression Bill S.B. 747

Private individuals have also engaged in efforts to suppress the right to vote of others, such as challenges brought in Georgia to almost 100,000 voter registrations. Similarly, lawsuits have been brought to decertify election results, including a recently dismissed lawsuit brought by voters who had unsuccessfully sought to decertify certain prior election results in Arizona.

•   Close to 100,000 Voter Registrations Were Challenged in Georgia — Almost All by Just Six Right-Wing Activists.

•   Deja Vu: After Arizona Supreme Court Dismisses Fringe Lawsuit, Similar Case Seeks To Decertify 2022 Election Results.  

Last, there are two upcoming elections on September 19 that may affect control of the House of Representatives in two states:  (1) a special election in Pennsylvania to replace former State Representative Sara Innamorato (D) whose resignation in July resulted in the Democrats losing a slim majority of one seat; and  (2) a special election in New Hampshire to replace Benjamin T. Bartlett IV (R), who resigned in April from the New Hampshire House of Representatives where Republicans currently hold a one-seat majority.

•   https://www.penncapital-star.com/campaigns-elections/for-third-time-this-year-special-election-will-decide-control-of-pa-house/

•   https://apnews.com/article/pennsylvania-house-democratic-majority-105c10e46ffb57c644e1818d9c30f004

•   https://news.ballotpedia.org/2023/08/24/hal-rafter-d-and-james-guzofski-r-are-running-in-the-sept-19-special-election-for-new-hampshire-house-district-rockingham-1/

CITATIONS

Further information about both elections and how to vote in these states is available from the League of Women Voters in Pennsylvania, athttps://lwvpgh.org/special, or in New Hampshire at https://lwvnh.org/events/. We encourage classmates who live in the states holding elections this year not only to exercise their right to vote, but also to volunteer at organizations providing assistance to voters, as mentioned in the above articles and on the spreadsheet entitled “Voting Activism Opportunities” posted on the ClassACT HR73 website. 

We also encourage all classmates to celebrate National Voter Registration Day, which falls on September 19 this year, by participating in community voter registration efforts. Information regarding opportunities to help people register to vote is available HERE.

In sum, America is firm in its commitment to democratic principles protected in the right to vote, but we are challenged by continuing efforts to erode democracy. However, we take heart in the statement of 13 Presidential Foundations and Centers across the United States, which for the first time, issued a joint statement on September 7^th regarding the future of our nation and an urgent call to action for all Americans. The statement notes that “democracy holds us together. We are a country rooted in the rule of law, where the protection of the rights of all people is paramount.”  See HERE.