South Florida Sun-Sentinel (Sunday)

Dems zero in on elections measure

Party says rules would make voting more uniform, fair

- By Christina A. Cassidy

The bill would mandate early voting, same-day registrati­on and other reforms that Republican­s reject.

Democrats plan to move quickly on one of the first bills of the new Congress, citing the need for federal election standards and other reforms to shore up the foundation­s of American democracy after a tumultuous post-election period and deadly riot at the U.S. Capitol.

States have long had disparate and contradict­ory rules for running elections. But the 2020 election, which featured pandemic-related changes to ease voting and then a flood of lawsuits by former President Donald Trump and his allies, underscore­d the difference­s from state to state.

Democrats, asserting constituti­onal authority to set the time, place and manner of federal elections, want national rules they say would make voting more uniform, accessible and fair across the nation. The bill would mandate early voting, sameday registrati­on and other long-sought reforms that Republican­s reject as federal overreach.

“We have just literally seen an attack on our own democracy,” said Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., referring to the Jan. 6 riot. “I cannot think of a more timely moment to start moving on democracy reform.”

The legislatio­n first introduced two years ago, known as the For the People Act, also would give independen­t commission­s the job of drawing congressio­nal districts, require political groups to disclose high-dollar donors, create reporting requiremen­ts for online political ads and obligate presidents to disclose their tax returns.

Republican opposition was fierce during the last session. At the time, then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., labeled it the “Democrat Politician Protection Act” and said in an op-ed that Democrats were seeking to “change the rules of American politics to benefit one party.”

While Democrats control Congress for the first time in a decade, the measure’s fate depends on whether enough Republican­s can be persuaded to reconsider a bill they have repeatedly rejected. If not, Democrats could decide to take the difficult step of eliminatin­g the Senate filibuster, a procedural tool often used by the minority party to block bills under rules that require 60 votes to advance legislatio­n.

Advocates say the bill is the most consequent­ial piece of voting legislatio­n since the Voting Rights Act of 1965. House Democrats reintroduc­ed the bill this month as H.R. 1, underscori­ng its importance to the party.

“People just want to be able to cast their vote without it being an ordeal,” said Rep. John Sarbanes, D-Md., who is the lead sponsor of the House bill. “It’s crazy in America that you still have to navigate an obstacle course to get to the ballot box.”

Current plans would have the full House take up the bill as soon as the first week of February. The Senate Rules Committee would then consider a companion bill introduced in the Senate, and a tie vote there could allow it to move out of committee and to the floor as early as next month, said Klobuchar, who is expected to become the committee’s next chair.

A quick vote would be remarkable considerin­g the Senate also is likely to be juggling Trump’s impeachmen­t trial, confirmati­on of President Joe Biden’s Cabinet choices and another round of coronaviru­s relief.

While states have long had different voting procedures, the November 2020 election highlighte­d how the variabilit­y could be used to sow doubt about the outcome. The bill’s supporters, which include national voting and civil rights organizati­ons, cited dozens of preelectio­n lawsuits that challenged procedural rules, such as whether ballots postmarked on Election Day should count.

They also pointed to the post-election litigation Trump and his allies filed to try to get millions of legitimate­ly cast ballots tossed out. Many of those lawsuits targeted election changes intended to make voting easier. That included a Pennsylvan­ia law the state’s Republican-led legislatur­e passed before the pandemic to make absentee ballots available to all registered voters upon request.

Government and election officials repeatedly have described the election as the most secure in U.S. history. Even former U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr, a Trump ally, said before leaving his post that there was no evidence of widespread fraud that would overturn the result.

“The strategy of lying about voter fraud, delegitimi­zing the election outcome and trying to suppress votes has been unmasked for the illegitima­te attack on our democracy that it is, and I think that it opens a lot more doors to real conversati­ons about how to fix our voting system and root out this cancer,” said Wendy Weiser, head of the democracy program at the Brennan Center for Justice, a public policy institute.

But Republican officials like Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill remain opposed. Merrill said the federal government’s role is limited and that states must be allowed to innovate and implement their own voting rules.

“Those decisions are best left up to the states, and I think the states are the ones that should determine what course of action they should take,” Merrill said, noting that Alabama has increased voter registrati­on and participat­ion without implementi­ng early voting.

 ?? ELISE AMENDOLA/AP ?? Election officials sort absentee and early voting ballots for counting in November inside Boston City Hall. The For the People Act would require states to offer early voting, same-day registrati­on and the option of absentee voting for all registered voters.
ELISE AMENDOLA/AP Election officials sort absentee and early voting ballots for counting in November inside Boston City Hall. The For the People Act would require states to offer early voting, same-day registrati­on and the option of absentee voting for all registered voters.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States