Iowa: No voting for felons, secretary of state’s office says | Des Moines Register

Iowa felons will continue to be disqualified from voting, even after a court ruling this week indicated that some felonies may not rise to a level that should bar those convicted from voting or holding office. The Iowa Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a second operating-while-intoxicated conviction, an aggravated misdemeanor, did not bar former state Sen. Tony Bisignano from running for state Senate again. Rival Democrat Ned Chiodo challenged Bisignano’s candidacy in the south-side Des Moines district, arguing that second-offense OWI was an “infamous crime” that would strip Bisignano of his voting and office-holding rights. In the ruling, Chief Justice Mark Cady wrote that Bisignano’s aggravated misdemeanor was not an “infamous crime.” Cady also wrote that the court should review in a future case whether some of Iowa’s 777 felony charges also might not rise to a level that would require stripping a person of voting rights.

Iowa: Supreme Court splits over what kinds of criminals can vote | On Brief

We didn’t have to wait long for the Supreme Court to decide its most important case of the term.  Last Tuesday, the justices heard arguments over whether a second OWI offense is an “infamous crime” under the Iowa Constitution.  Yesterday–one week after the oral argument–the Iowa Supreme Court ruled, by a 5-1 vote, that it’s not. That might not seem that important.  It is. For starters, it means that Tony Bisignano can run for State Senate.  Article II, section 5 of the Iowa Constitution says that a person who’s been convicted of an “infamous crime” can’t be an “elector” (which means they can’t run for office), and one of Bisignano’s primary opponents (Ned Chiodo) argued that a second OWI (which Bisignano has been convicted of) is an infamous crime.  Five of the six sitting justices disagreed with that. (The seventh, Justice Appel, was recused.) But the case is much bigger than one Senate race.  And that’s where it gets interesting. To vote you also have to be an eligible “elector,” meaning that people who’ve been convicted of an infamous crime can’t vote–at least not unless their voting rights have been restored.  So the line between an infamous crime and a run-of-the-mill crime can affect everything from school boards to the presidency.  (Iowa’s a swing state, after all.)

Iowa: Despite ruling, Iowa to bar all felons from voting | Associated Press

Iowa elections officials will continue to bar convicted felons from voting despite a landmark state Supreme Court ruling that suggests not all of them lost their voting rights, a spokesman said Wednesday. Three justices ruled Tuesday that only some felonies are “infamous crimes” under the Iowa Constitution that bar individuals from voting or holding office. Writing for that group, Chief Justice Mark Cady said only crimes that suggest the offenders “would tend to undermine the process of democratic governance through elections” qualify. Cady said justices would have to “develop a more precise test” in future rulings to define them. The ruling concluded that state Senate candidate Tony Bisignano can hold office even though he had been convicted of second-offense operating while intoxicated, an aggravated misdemeanor. Cady’s opinion invalidated three of the court’s prior rulings dating to 1916, which had held that any offense for which the potential punishment is imprisonment was an “infamous crime.” Cady suggested the new definition followed the intent of authors of Iowa’s Constitution, who wanted to protect the integrity of elections.

Iowa: Supreme Court: Drunken driving conviction shouldn’t keep candidate off ballot | Associated Press

A split Iowa Supreme Court issued a ruling Tuesday that allows a Des Moines man to run for state Senate and affirms that second-offense drunken driving is not an infamous crime as defined by the Iowa Constitution. The opinion reverses the long-standing approach that a crime carrying a prison sentence is an infamous crime. Instead of taking the next step in drawing a clear definition, the court in a 5-1 ruling said it need not precisely define infamous crime now. The court did say however, that it would “be prudent for us to develop a more precise test that distinguishes between felony crimes and infamous crimes” in a future case. The case arose from a Democratic primary battle between Anthony Bisignano and Ned Chiodo, both former lawmakers, who are seeking the Des Moines-area Senate seat Jack Hatch is vacating to run for governor. Chiodo challenged Bisignano’s candidacy on the theory that since Bisignano has been convicted of second-offense drunken driving, an aggravated misdemeanor in Iowa, he should be disqualified from running for office or voting. At issue was whether an aggravated misdemeanor falls under the Iowa Constitution’s definition of an infamous crime, which would mean Bisignano cannot vote or hold public office.

Iowa: Officials: Iowa law may void some absentee ballots | Associated Press

Lawmakers have been unable to change a state law on postmarked absentee ballots that may accidentally void some valid ballots. Election officials say some valid ballots over the years could have been invalidated because the Postal Service doesn’t always postmark business reply mail envelopes, The Des Moines Register reported (http://dmreg.co/Q6Vtv7 ). Voters return completed absentee ballots in those envelopes. State law requires that absentee ballots received after Election Day must be stamped with a postmark from the day before Election Day or earlier. The law has been in effect for years. But an accompanying administrative rule that allowed election officials to open ballots received after Election Day without a postmark and check the date on the enclosed voter affidavit was repealed in 2011.

Iowa: State finds 12 votes were wrongly rejected in 2012 | Associated Press

At least 12 Iowa residents wrongly had their ballots rejected in the 2012 presidential election because of inaccuracies in the state’s list of ineligible felons, a review found Friday. Secretary of State Matt Schultz announced that nine additional cases of improper disenfranchisement were found during a review launched after it was reported in January that three voters were disenfranchised because of bureaucratic mistakes. The new cases include people who weren’t felons but were wrongly included on the list and former offenders who had their voting rights restored and should have been removed.

Iowa: State Supreme Court hears key voting rights case | Associated Press

Justices of the Iowa Supreme Court on Wednesday peppered lawyers with questions as they waded into the difficult issue of determining whether someone convicted of an aggravated misdemeanor should be disqualified from voting and holding public office in Iowa. The court heard arguments in a case in which state senate primary rival Ned Chiodo is seeking to disqualify Tony Bisignano based on his conviction for second-offense drunken driving. Both men are seeking the Democratic nomination for Des Moines-area seat to be vacated by Jack Hatch, a Democratic candidate for governor. At issue is whether an aggravated misdemeanor falls under the Iowa Constitution’s definition of an infamous crime, which would mean Bisignano cannot vote or hold public office.

Iowa: State Supreme Court will hear appeal in state Senate ballot case involving Des Moines race | Des Moines Register

allows a Democratic candidate to remain on the ballot for an Iowa Senate race in Des Moines is being appealed for a second time. Gary Dickey, a lawyer for former state Rep. Ned Chiodo, said the Iowa Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case at 9 a.m. Wednesday. Chiodo is challenging a decision by District Judge David Christensen, who ruled Wednesday that former state Sen. Tony Bisignano is eligible to run for office despite a conviction for second-offense drunken driving.

Iowa: Matt Schultz to appeal decision invalidating voter registration rule | Des Moines Register

Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz will appeal the decision handed down last month nullifying rules his office wrote regarding voter registration. The Republican, who has made voter fraud investigations and ballot security efforts the centerpiece of his term in office, on Thursday asked the Iowa Supreme Court to review and overturn the March 6 ruling which said he exceeded his authority regulate elections in the state. At issue in the case, American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa v. Schultz, was a rule issued by Schultz’s office to identify and remove ineligible voters from the state’s voter rolls. The rule outlined a process for identifying and removing non-citizens from Iowa’s voter registration list first by screening registered voters against state and national lists of non-citizens and then running suspected foreign nationals through a federal citizenship database. Voters identified as ineligible were then to be referred to their local county auditor, who would initiate a challenge to their registration.

Iowa: Anderson: Use fed money for poll book expansion, not investigations | Quad City Times

Iowa Secretary of State candidate Brad Anderson said Tuesday he plans to stop the use of federal funds to pay for investigations into alleged voter fraud and instead use the money, as well as other funds, to expand the use of electronic poll books. He also said he plans to clean up a flawed list of ineligible voters. Anderson, a Democrat, was campaigning Tuesday in Clinton, and he released a plan he said represents a clean break from the policies of Republican Matt Schultz, the current Secretary of State who is leaving the office to run for Congress. “Iowa has a history of clean, fair elections, and I believe we should have a chief elections official who recognizes that fact,” Anderson said.

Iowa: Primary dispute risks voting rights for thousands | Associated Press

A primary skirmish between two Des Moines politicians running for a state Senate seat could have a sweeping impact on voter eligibility in Iowa. In a Capitol meeting room Friday, the battle lines were drawn between Democrats Tony Bisignano and Ned Chiodo, both vying for the seat that Jack Hatch is vacating to run for governor. Chiodo says that Bisignano should be disqualified from the race because of a drunken driving conviction in January.

Iowa: Jury acquits ex-felon in Iowa voter fraud case | The Des Moines Register

A former drug offender who voted in a municipal election despite having lost her right to cast a ballot was acquitted of perjury Thursday, in the first trial stemming from Iowa’s two-year investigation into voter fraud. Jurors rejected the prosecution’s argument that Kelli Jo Griffin intentionally lied on a voter registration form before casting a ballot in an uncontested mayoral and council election in the southeastern Iowa town of Montrose. Griffin, a 40-year-old mother of young children, would have faced up to 15 years in prison if convicted. Griffin had lost her voting rights following a 2008 felony conviction for delivery of cocaine. She testified that she believed her right to vote had been restored when she left probation last year, which had been the state’s policy until 2011. Lee County Attorney Michael Short argued that Griffin deliberately left blank a question on the form asking whether she was a convicted felon, saying she was trying to hide her past as a drug dealer. Iowa is now one of four states in which ex-offenders have to apply to the governor to regain their voting rights.

Iowa: Voting rights of an estimated 50,000 at stake in Friday decision | Radio Iowa

The legal battle over whether a second drunk driving offense bars someone from running for office in Iowa was waged before a three-member review panel Wednesday, with Iowa’s attorney general suggesting the voting rights of tens of thousands of Iowans could be at stake. “Our calculations of how many people are in jeopardy is about 50,000,” said Attorney General Tom Miller . Miller is part of the panel that will meet again Friday to decide the case and determine who can participate in a Democratic primary for a Des Moines-area senate seat.

Iowa: Schultz’s crusade is out of sync | The Des Moines Register

Since he took office three years ago, Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz has focused more energy on revoking peoples’ right to vote than on getting eligible voters to turn out for elections. It seems to us Schultz has had it backward, and now it’s apparent a healthy majority of Iowans agree. According to The Des Moines Register’s Iowa Poll published March 10, a substantial majority of Iowans surveyed put a higher priority on making sure that “every eligible, registered voter has the opportunity to vote” than on making sure that “no person ineligible to vote slips through the cracks” to cast a vote. Seven in 10 poll participants said assuring the right to vote is more important than eliminating ineligible voters. Only a quarter saw it the other way around. The top priority favored by most Iowans ought to be the top priority of the state’s election officials, from the secretary of state to the 99 county auditors who run elections. That has been the priority of past secretaries of state, including most recently Mike Mauro and, before him, Chet Culver when he was in the job before being elected governor. Schultz, however, launched a relentless campaign to root out ineligible voters.

Iowa: Republicans question Iowa’s key role in presidential balloting | Los Angeles Times

For more than 40 years, Iowa voters have played a vital role in picking the nation’s president, culling the field of hopefuls and helping launch a fortunate handful all the way to the White House. For about 35 of those years, Iowa has been the target of jealousy and scorn, mainly from outsiders who say the state, the first to vote in the presidential contest, is too white and too rural; that its caucuses, precinct-level meetings of party faithful, are too quirky and too exclusionary to play such a key role in the nominating process. Now, a swelling chorus of critics is mounting a fresh challenge to Iowa’s privileged role, targeting especially the August straw poll held the year before the election, which traditionally established the Republican Party front-runner. Increasingly, critics say, the informal balloting has proved a meaningless and costly diversion of time and money. Some GOP strategists are urging candidates to think hard before coming to Iowa at all.

Iowa: Poll: Access to voting trumps voter fraud concerns | The Des Moines Register

A wide majority of Iowans believe it’s more important to ensure ballot access for eligible voters than to guard against voting by those who are ineligible. That result, captured in The Des Moines Register’s latest Iowa Poll, casts new light on a debate that has been raging in the state and across the nation for years over the appropriate balance between ballot access and security. Seventy-one percent of poll respondents say it’s more important that every eligible, registered voter is able to vote, compared with 25 percent who say it’s more important that no ineligible person “slips through the cracks” to cast a vote. “Americans care about preventing voter fraud, but they care more about making voting free, fair and accessible,” said Myrna Perez, an expert on voting rights and elections at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.

Iowa: Branstad aide must be deposed in Iowa voting case | Associated Press

The attorney for an ex-felon charged with illegally voting must be allowed to question an aide to Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad before the trial begins, a judge ruled Thursday. Kelli Jo Griffin’s attorney had claimed that Branstad aide Rebecca Elming, a prosecution witness, refused to be deposed last week on the advice of state lawyers. But Branstad spokesman Jimmy Centers disputed that Thursday, saying the deposition had not been scheduled. “Now that a deposition has been requested, we will work with the parties to make Elming available,” he said. Judge Mary Ann Brown said Griffin had a right to depose Elming before trial, which she delayed from Thursday until March 19 due to an attorney’s illness.

Iowa: Judge strikes down Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz’s voter purge efforts | Omaha World Herald

Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz did not have the authority to create a new rule aimed at ridding voter registration rolls of voters who didn’t appear to be U.S. citizens, a judge said Wednesday. Polk County Judge Scott Rosenberg ordered the rule stricken and said Iowa’s secretary of state is “enjoined from taking any action” pursuant to the rule. Rosenberg gave a victory to the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa and the League of United Latin American Citizens of Iowa, which sued Schultz over the rule, saying it could intimidate or unfairly deny votes to immigrants. Schultz tried to pass it as an emergency rule just before the November 2012 general election. Another judge halted the rule before the election, concluding that it created confusion and mistrust in the voter registration process.

Iowa: Judge blocks rule canceling voter’s registration | Times Republican

Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz did not have the authority to create a new rule aimed at ridding voter registration rolls of voters who didn’t appear to be U.S. citizens, a judge said Wednesday. Polk County Judge Scott Rosenberg delivered a victory to the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa and the League of United Latin American Citizens of Iowa, which sued Schultz over the rule. He tried to pass it as an emergency rule just before the November 2012 general election. Another judge halted the rule before the election, concluding that it created confusion and mistrust in the voter registration process. Schultz, however, proceeded to pass a similar rule through the regular rulemaking process last year but it too was halted by Rosenberg, who in September issued a temporary injunction preventing Schultz from acting on it until the court could further review the legal questions. Rosenberg said then that the rule would have a chilling effect on the right to vote and could cause irreparable harm.

Iowa: Court throws out secretary of state’s controversial voter registration rule | The Des Moines Register

A Polk County court has struck down a controversial rule issued by Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz meant to identify and remove ineligible voters from the state’s voter rolls. Judge Scott D. Rosenberg found that Schultz, a Republican who has built his reputation and focused his office on ballot security issues, exceeded his authority in adopting the rule. The order invalidates the rule and assesses costs associated with the case to Schultz’s office. A spokesman for the secretary said his office plans to appeal. The rule at issue set out a process for identifying and removing non-citizens from Iowa’s voter registration list first by screening registered voters against state and national lists of noncitizens and then running suspected foreign nationals through the federal Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements database. Voters identified as ineligible would then be referred to their local county auditor, who would initiate a challenge to their registration.

Iowa: Senate passes online voter registration bill | Associated Press

A bill that would set up a system for online voter registration in Iowa unanimously passed in the Senate on Monday without debate and moved to the House for further work on verification of electronic signatures. Under the bill, which passed 48-0, voters must provide the same information required on other voter registration forms. They would use the secretary of state’s website to electronically register. Those registering must have an Iowa driver’s license, a Social Security number or other identifying number, and they must attest that all information is correct. The measure makes fraudulent electronic registration a class D felony.

Iowa: Senate considers ex-felon voting rights bill | Spencer Daily Reporter

On the floor of the Iowa Senate waits Senate File 2203, a bill that would reinstate the voting rights of ex-felons automatically after they finish serving their criminal sentences. Another version of the bill, Senate File 127, has already been killed by the Senate. “There is a provision in the state constitution that’s been interpreted to disqualify felons from voting,” Sen. David Johnson (R-Ocheyedan) explained of the current rules in place on ex-felon voting rights. “And a process has been set up subsequently that allowed ex-felons to apply to have their voting rights restored by the governor.” During his term as governor, Tom Vilsack issued an executive order during his term that “rubber stamped” the application process to have voting rights reinstated. “Vilsack’s executive order rubber stamped without giving consideration to whether the individuals paid their restitution,” Johnson said.

Iowa: Voter fraud investigation concludes; 80 additional cases referred to prosecutors | The Des Moines Register

A controversial investigation into alleged voter fraud has concluded, the investigator leading the effort said Monday. Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation Special Agent Adam DeCamp said Monday that the probe aimed at identifying and prosecuting fraudulent Iowa voters ended Feb. 13, roughly 20 months after it began. Since September, when DeCamp took over as the lead investigator, the effort has scrutinized 245 individual voters. Of those, more than 80 have been referred to county attorneys for possible prosecution. It will be up to prosecutors on whether to bring charges based on the evidence provided by the DCI.

Iowa: Lawmakers advance online voter registration bill | Associated Press

Legislation that would allow online voter registration in Iowa advanced in the state Senate Wednesday. The bill received preliminary backing in a Senate subcommittee was set to go to the full State Government Committee for approval. Under the proposal, the Iowa Secretary of State would oversee an online voter registration system that would be available by 2015. Sen. Jeff Danielson, D- Cedar Falls, said he wants to make registration more “customer-friendly,” while still ensuring that the system is secure. Those registering would have to supply identifying information and meet voter eligibility standards. “We think government can adopt some of those business practices and be more customer-friendly, but also recognizing that there is an inherent right to vote,” Danielson said. Sen. Jake Chapman, R-Adel, declined to approve the bill in subcommittee, but said he thought it was moving in the right direction.

Iowa: Voter fraud probe becomes a numbers game | Sioux City Journal

One vote can determine an election, Republicans intent on fighting voter fraud say consistently. That thought drives a investigation ordered by Secretary of State Matt Schultz and carried out by the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigation to find fraudulent voting in Iowa. “We have evidence that people have gone to the polls and voted when they weren’t supposed to,” Schultz said. “There are several Senate seats that were decided by 20 votes or less.” The actual number from the 2012 and 2010 elections is two, an IowaWatch review of the state’s voting results shows.

Iowa: Ex-felon voting rights bill gets OK from split Iowa Senate panel | The Des Moines Register

The Iowa Senate State Government Committee split along party lines Wednesday in approving a bill to make it easier for ex-convicts to regain their right to vote Senate File 127 requires that upon discharge from certain criminal sentences, citizenship rights related to voting and holding public office must be restored. The measure was approved on a 9-6 vote with all Democrats in favor and all Republicans against. The bill now goes to the Senate floor, where it is likely to win approval. However, Republicans who control the Iowa House are unlikely to consider the measure. Under a policy enacted in 2005 by then-Democratic Gov. Tom Vilsack, former offenders automatically regained their voting rights once they were discharged from prison or parole. But when Gov. Terry Branstad, a Republican, returned to office in 2011 he signed an executive order that has made it much more difficult for ex-felons to vote.

Iowa: Election officials unable to verify felons’ rights | The Des Moines Register

Iowa elections officials don’t have a uniform or accurate way to check whether potential voters are ineligible felons — a systematic failure that has resulted in people being wrongly disenfranchised or allowed to vote illegally. In interviews with The Associated Press, state and county officials blame a lack of funding, disparate use of technology at polling places and record-keeping errors. Major shifts in state policy have exacerbated the problem by creating confusion among offenders and bureaucrats. Attorney General Eric Holder called on Iowa and other states Tuesday to restore voting rights for former inmates, saying that millions of citizens are unfairly disenfranchised. He criticized Gov. Terry Branstad’s 2011 order requiring former felons to apply to regain their voting rights instead of having them automatically restored, noting that only a tiny number of ex-offenders have done so.

Iowa: Democratic-backed bill restoring voting rights for ex-convicts clears Iowa Senate panel | The Des Moines Register

A divided Iowa Senate subcommittee approved a bill Thursday to make it easier for ex-convicts to regain their right to vote. Senate File 127 requires that upon discharge from certain criminal sentences, citizenship rights related to voting and holding public office must be restored. Under a policy enacted in 2005 by then-Democratic Gov. Tom Vilsack, former offenders automatically regained their voting rights once they were discharged from prison or parole. But when Gov. Terry Branstad, a Republican returned to office in 2011 he signed an executive order that has made it much more difficult for ex-felons to vote. Branstad’s policy requires that all court-ordered restitution be paid to victims in full before they apply for a restoration of voting rights.The governor used his power of executive clemency to restore the right to vote and hold public office to 21 offenders who applied in 2013, which was a tiny fraction of the thousands of ex-offenders who have been freed from Iowa’s prisons in recent years.

Iowa: Secretary of state to seek more funds for voter fraud investigation | The Gazette

Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz will ask the Legislature for $140,000 to pursue voter fraud for another year despite openly hostile criticism from Senate majority Democrats Tuesday for his two-year investigation. Schultz, a first-term Republican, has come under fire for using $240,000 in funds from the federal Help America Vote Act (HAVA) to pay for a Division of Criminal Investigation agent to look into voter fraud. HAVA was established after the disputed 2000 presidential election to fund voter education and voter participation efforts. After nearly two years of investigation, 26 people have been charged and five have pleaded guilty to misdemeanors. “That’s enough for me to see that we have a problem,” Schultz said. “Twenty-six people cancelling the vote of other Iowans is a big enough problem to keep this going forward.”

Iowa: Secretary of State, Senators clash over voter registration error | Radio Iowa

References to “being in the hot seat” and “crossing swords” with legislators popped up during Republican Secretary of State Matt Schultz’s appearance before a senate committee this afternoon. Democrats who’ve criticized Schultz for investigating voter fraud focused on the plight of three eligible voters who had their 2012 ballots tossed out because they were mistakenly on a list of ineligible voters. Schultz told legislators it was his fraud investigation that resolved things. “These three people would not have their voting rights today restored and in the system fixed for them were it not for these DCI investigations,” Schultz said.