Editorials: Protecting Voting Rights Is Not “Crazy | Spencer Overton/Huffington Post

I attended yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in the Arizona voter registration case. The argument went well generally, but Justice Alito suggested the Justices would create a “crazy” double standard by requiring that Arizona election officials accept the federal registration form. Alito’s concerns are unwarranted. Arizona chose to create two standards when it chose to add special “proof of citizenship” to register. The National Voter Registration Act requires that all states “accept and use” a single, uniform voter registration form for federal elections (states can also still use their own registration forms). The Federal Form requires that prospective voters check a box and sign an affirmation that they are U.S. citizens under penalty of perjury. Arizona, however, adopted a state law requiring “satisfactory proof” of U.S. citizenship to register, such as a birth certificate, U.S. passport, or state driver’s license that shows citizenship. As a result, Arizona rejected over 31,000 registrations that lacked its “proof of citizenship”–including Federal Forms–even though Arizona concedes it has no evidence that any of these individuals were non-citizens.

Arizona: Voter Registration Law Takes Heat At Supreme Court | Fox News

Monday marked yet another Supreme Court showdown for Arizona and the Obama administration. At issue, this time, was the state’s Proposition 200 measure, which requires voter registration applicants to provide documentation proving U.S. citizenship. Critics of the measure say the state has no authority to go beyond what’s required on the simplified federal voter registration form. On the federal form applicants must check a box indicating U.S. citizenship, sign attesting to that fact and drop the form in the mail. Arizona officials, citing hundreds of cases of non-U.S. citizens registering to vote, say additional barriers need to be put in place.  Under Proposition 200, applicants can present a number of various documents, including driver’s license, birth certificate and certain Native American tribal documents. “If somebody’s willing to fraudulently vote, that person would be willing to sign falsely,” said Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne, who argued the case Monday. “We need evidence that the person is a citizen,” he added.

National: U.S. Supreme Court justices ask tough questions on voter registration law | Arizona Republic

The U.S. Supreme Court’s nine justices lobbed a volley of tough questions at Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne on Monday as he argued for the state’s voter-registration law aimed at keeping illegal immigrants off the voter rolls. At stake is Proposition 200, a law passed overwhelmingly by voters in 2004, that asks Arizonans who want to vote to provide documentary proof of citizenship, such as a copy of a driver’s license, birth certificate, passport, tribal identification card or naturalization number. The law goes beyond what federal voter-registration rules require for proof. The law inflamed the immigration debate when it was passed and was almost immediately challenged by voting-rights advocates as burdensome to the young, elderly, minorities or naturalized citizens and to voter-registration organizations. Supporters touted the law as a check against voter fraud.

National: States may follow AZ’s lead requiring citizenship proof to register to vote | NBC

Arizona is once again serving as a national flash point in a Supreme Court case to decide the legality of its law requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote. Oral arguments began on Monday with Sonia Sotomayor and Antonin Scalia squaring off, but experts say the law may lead to a trend of similar state laws if it is allowed to stand. At issue is the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, which was created to make it easier to register to vote and for an individual to maintain their registration. The “Motor Voter” section of the law allows people to register to vote by mailing in a form where they are asked if they are citizens. Prospective voters must check yes or no and sign the form under penalty of perjury. Arizona’s 2004 law requires documentation of citizenship to use the form. “I’m afraid we’re moving away from the Motor Voter trend,” says Thomas Saenz, the president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF). “Arizona seems to be the initiator of these restrictive laws. It’s an act to deter those who are eligible to vote when there is no evidence of any fraudulent voting.”

National: Voting Rights Advocates Sound Alarm As Supreme Court Hears Proof-Of-Citizenship Case | TPM

Voting rights advocates are sounding the warning sirens as the Supreme Court hears oral arguments Monday on a low-profile but important case on whether states may require people to submit proof of citizenship when registering to vote. At issue is whether the Arizona law, known as Proposition 200, violates a federal law that requires states to let people register to vote while renewing drivers licenses or applying for social services. The form provided by the National Voter Registration Act requires people to attest that they are U.S. citizens, but not to provide documented proof, like the Arizona law does. “If Arizona’s brazen attempt to evade the mandates of the NVRA is upheld, it will make it tougher for voters in Arizona to register, and other states with legislatures that are looking to suppress the vote will surely try to pass copycat legislation,” said Doug Kendall, president of the liberal-leaning Constitutional Accountability Center. “If the Court accepts Arizona’s most sweeping arguments against the NVRA, its ruling could severely limit Congress’ power to protect the right of Americans to register to vote.”

National: Must Voters Have To Prove Citizenship To Register? | NPR

The Supreme Court will struggle this week with the validity of an Arizona law that tries to keep illegal immigrants from voting by demanding all state residents show documents proving their U.S. citizenship before registering to vote in national elections. The high court will hear arguments Monday over the legality of Arizona’s voter-approved requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a registration form produced under the federal “Motor Voter” voter registration law that doesn’t require such documentation. This case focuses on voter registration in Arizona, which has tangled frequently with the federal government over immigration issues involving the Mexican border. But it has broader implications because four other states — Alabama, Georgia, Kansas and Tennessee — have similar requirements, and 12 other states are contemplating similar legislation, officials say. The Obama administration is supporting challengers to the law.

National: Supreme Court hears Arizona’s voter proof-of-citizenship case | McClatchy

An Arizona law requiring would-be voters to show proof of U.S. citizenship seemed to divide Supreme Court justices Monday in a case important to many states that want to stiffen their own voting standards. Conservative justices sounded sympathetic to Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship requirement, while more liberal justices suggested the measure might conflict with a 1993 law passed by Congress called the National Voter Registration Act. The eventual ruling will define when federal law pre-empts state efforts, a legal determination that accompanies political controversies ranging from illegal immigration to allegations of voter suppression. “Many people don’t have the documents that Arizona requires,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted pointedly at the start of the hour-long oral argument Monday. Sotomayor and Justice Elena Kagan, a fellow Obama administration appointee, pushed back most vigorously against the Arizona law. From the other side, though, Republican appointees, including Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel Alito, pressed questions seemingly supportive of Arizona’s actions.

Editorials: Arizona argument preview: Election integrity, or voter suppression? | SCOTUSblog

At 10 a.m. Monday, the Supreme Court will hold one hour of oral argument on state power to require would-be voters to show proof of citizenship to register.  Arguing for state and local officials in Arizona v. The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona (docket 12-71), will be Arizona Attorney General Thomas C. Horne, with thirty minutes of time.  Arguing for the challengers will be Patricia A. Millett of the Washington office of the law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, with twenty minutes of time.  Representing the federal government as amicus will be Deputy U.S. Solicitor General Sri Srinivasan, with ten minutes of time. With memories still fresh about widespread complaints in last year’s presidential election about efforts to tighten the requirements for voting, especially affecting minority voters, the Supreme Court takes up the constitutional puzzle — existing since the Founding era — over who controls election procedures.  And in the background is the abiding partisan debate over whether such voter qualification rules are needed to combat election fraud, or are merely a cover for suppressing minority voting. The Supreme Court may not settle that political argument, but its coming ruling in the case of Arizona v. The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona could have a major influence on how elections for the presidency and for Congress are conducted in the future.  And, of course, there could be a spillover effect for state and local elections, too.

Editorials: Arizona voter ID law should be overturned | The Washington Post

Compared with what some Americans have to tolerate on Election Day, registering to vote is relatively painless. That’s partly thanks to the National Voter Registration Act, a 1993 law at the root of a case the Supreme Court will hear on Monday. The state of Arizona argues that it should be allowed to subvert the law’s obvious purpose. The court shouldn’t let it. In 1993, Congress looked at the “complicated maze” of often confusing and sometimes discriminatory state election rules, and it found that “unfair registration laws and procedures can have a direct and damaging effect on voter participation in elections for federal office.” So lawmakers established national standards. Americans could register to vote when getting driver’s licenses, which gave the act its unofficial name: the “motor voter” law. Congress also required every state to accept a simple, common, mail-in registration form drafted by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. The record indicates that Congress meant these to be among the “procedures that will increase the number of eligible citizens who register to vote in elections for federal office.”In 2004, Arizona voters approved a state law requiring evidence of U.S. citizenship in order to register to vote. As a result, state elections officials no longer accepted standard federal registration forms unless accompanied by copies of passports, birth certificates or other proof of citizenship. Native American and Hispanic groups complained, and now the dispute is before the high court.

Arizona: Glitch costs couple their right to vote | Mohave Daily News

Two Bullhead City residents were denied their right to vote in Tuesday’s primary election, apparently over the county’s mapping of the street where their residence is. Shaukat and Marie Ali were told they don’t live in the city. Someone at the polling place contacted the Mohave County Voter Registration office in Kingman. “When they called up, they gave them my registration ID number, and based on the ID number, they said we didn’t live in the city,” Shaukat Ali said. “I can’t be more sorry that he was disenfranchised,” said Mohave County Voter Registration Supervisor Kim Stewart. Ali’s street, Lakeview Drive, was built in 2005 and has seven registered voters living on it, according to Stewart. The street was incorrectly shown to be in the Davis Dam Precinct, outside of the Bullhead City limits. Lakeview Drive certainly is within the city limits; it’s a U-shaped cul de sac off Desert Trails Drive east of the Bullhead Parkway. It is nowhere close to the Davis Dam Precinct, which is north of the city limits in the area of Davis Dam and Lake Mohave. “No one’s ever mentioned it to us (by asking why their ballot didn’t include city elections) so we didn’t know it was broken,” Stewart said.

Arizona: Justices will probe Arizona’s voter registration law | ABA Journal

It’s almost spring, and that means the usual seasonal rites in the District of Columbia: the cherry blossom trees, the deluge of students—and another case before the U.S. Supreme Court involving a controversial law passed by the state of Arizona. The Grand Canyon State has been before the justices to defend its laws or programs five times over the last three years. In 2010, the high court: upheld an Arizona immigration law that penalized businesses if they employ illegal immigrants; struck down a state law providing for matching funds for candidates for state office that was meant to put them on an equal footing with wealthy, privately financed candidates; and held that a group of taxpayers lacked standing to challenge a state program of tax credits for donations for private school tuition. Last term, the justices ruled that several provisions of the state’s controversial immigration law, SB 1070, were pre-empted by federal law. The court also declined to enjoin a provision requiring the police to verify the immigration status of people they stop or arrest. This year’s offering is Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, a case about voter registration procedures that comes with an undercurrent of concern over illegal immigration. Arguments are scheduled for March 18.

Arizona: Court to rule on Arizona voting law | SCOTUSblog

The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to rule on the constitutionality of a state requirement that voters must prove they are U.S. citizens before they register to vote and cast their ballots.   The Court granted review of an Arizona case in which it previously had refused the state’s request to block a lower court decision that struck down that requirement.  Arizona’s voters adopted that law when they passed “Proposition 200″ in 2004.  The Court will not rule on the case until after this year’s election, so the requirement will not be in effect next month.  (The case is Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., docket 11-71.) That was the only new case granted Monday.   In one significant denial, the Court refused to consider imposing a heavier duty on managers of employee retirement plans to justify investing plan assets in the company’s own stock.  The Court turned aside without comment two petitions on that issue.  (Gray v. Citigroup, 11-1531, and Gearren v. McGraw-Hill Companies, 11-1550.)

Zimbabwe: Election body won’t ease group’s monitor ban, Mugabe party probes cheap radio imports | The Washington Post

Zimbabwe’s official election body said Wednesday it will not back down on its ban preventing a leading human rights group from monitoring a referendum Saturday on a new constitution. Zimbabwe Human Rights Association is facing charges related to alleged electoral offenses and will not be cleared to observe the referendum, said the election commission’s acting head Joyce Kazembe. Officials with the group, also known as ZimRights, have been accused of the illegal possession of voter registration forms and fraud in obtaining them. The group denies any wrongdoing. Most independent civic groups say they will boycott vote monitoring Saturday if any activists are barred access to observe polling. Police loyal to President Robert Mugabe have intensified raids and arrests targeting activist groups in recent weeks and have seized from offices documents and equipment, including cheap radio receivers that can tune in to stations not controlled by Mugabe’s local broadcasting monopoly.

Arizona: Proposal to change voter-registration rules fueling debate

To Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne, the state law requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration is “common sense,” not a burden. To opponents, Arizona’s Proposition 200 is just another obstacle that would restrict access to the polls for the young, elderly and minorities. The U.S. Supreme Court will weigh in this month in a hearing that will be watched closely by voting-rights advocates and by several other states with similar laws. At issue in the March 18 hearing is a decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said federal law trumps state law on voter-registration requirements. The appeals court said in April that voters could use a federal mail-in registration form, established by the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, which requires that they attest to their citizenship only through a signature.

Iowa: Legislative panel doesn’t stop voter purge rule | Associated Press

A controversial voting rule targeting immigrants without U.S. citizenship will take effect this month after a state oversight committee failed to stop it Friday, but activists are threating an immediate court fight. The rule, proposed by Secretary of State Matt Schultz, establishes a way to remove from voter registration lists an individual whose citizenship is questioned. The Republican says the change is needed to reduce voter fraud, which he’s made his key issue, but opponents say the rule intimidates immigrants who are citizens. The Administrative Rules Review Committee voted 5-5 along party lines on a motion to object to the rule. But since the objection needed six votes to pass, the rule will automatically take effect March 27. The legislative panel oversees state government agency rules and is evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans. Schultz first proposed the change just a few weeks before November’s general election, but a Polk County judge blocked it after a lawsuit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa. The ACLU said Friday it would do the same on the day the new rule takes effect.

Voting Blogs: 2013 Kenyan Elections: Post-Election Report | The Monkey Cage

Kenyan elections have been underway for slightly more than 24 hours, and the much-touted voting technology, or lack thereof, has been at the center of attention. Within hours of the opening of the polling centers, reports from around the country announced the failure of the biometric voter identification system. This technology, which recorded voters’ fingerprints and other biographical data during the voter registration process, was meant to then identify registered voters on Election Day, using Kenyans’ individual biometric identity information. Due to a number of problems, including power outages, low battery life of the devices and polling officials’ difficulty accessing the central system, however, many stations had to resort to using the manual register.

Zimbabwe: Credible elections a farce? | The Zimbabwean

There is already acrimony in the Government of National Unity with the MDC-T claiming there is a resurgence of politically motivated violence by Zanu (PF), with the most recent case being the death of 12-year-old, Christpower Maisiri, who was caught in a suspected arson in Headlands. MDC-T Secretary General, Tendai Biti, has laid the blame for Maisiri’s death on Zanu (PF) Secretary for Administration, Didymus Mutasa. Another disturbing trend is the alleged manipulation of the voter registration process by Zanu (PF). MDC-T has claimed that its supports wishing to register are being frustrated at various Registrar General’s offices across the country while Zanu (PF) supporters have no problem with registration. Recently, an MDC-T official revealed to The Zimbabwean that Zanu (PF) officials working in cahoots with officers form the Registrar General’s Department were registering rural voters to vote in urban constituencies in a bid to cover up for their 2008 loss.

Tennessee: Nashville election commission could rescind vote seeking foreign-born voter review | The Tennessean

The Davidson County Election Commission is expected to reconsider a controversial vote that one member said would call for “profiling” foreign-born voters. The commission voted 3-2 on Feb. 21 to ask the Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security to review the citizenship status of recently registered voters who were born outside the United States. But Metro attorneys later said doing so would violate the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the National Voter Registration Act — also known as the “motor voter law” — by creating two different classes of voters and scrutinizing one class more than the other. Steve Abernathy, the Republican election commissioner who proposed the move, said he wanted to see whether non-citizens, while living here legally, have been improperly registering to vote during the process of applying for driver’s licenses. “The process at the Department of Safety is not set up to prevent them from completing a voter registration card,” Abernathy said. “And then (state officials) send that information to the election commission, but all we get is the completed card. We don’t get the backup information. There’s no way to verify a person’s citizenship at the Davidson County Election Commission.”

Hawaii: Hands Off! Bill Bars Candidates From Touching Voters’ Ballots | Honolulu Civil Beat

Political candidates will shake hands, kiss keiki and sign-wave like crazy during election season — anything to get elected. Under proposed legislation, one thing they would not be allowed to do is touch a voter’s ballot. Senate Bill 827 would prohibit candidates from physically handling or possessing absentee ballots and voter registration forms. It seems to be another piece of legislation related to allegations of voter intimidation in the 2012 primary. SB 827 brings to mind House Bill 1027, which aims to ensure the integrity of absentee ballots. That measure would require that absentee ballots include information about election and voter fraud, and prohibit employers, unions and candidates “or their agents” from assisting voters in completing absentee ballots.

Zimbabwe: Biometrics technology for Zimbabwe polls | Samuel Chindaro/The Zimbabwe Independent

The call for employment of technology in Zimbabwe for both voter registration and facilitation of the electoral process is not entirely new. Masvingo MP Tongai Matutu called for the introduction of biometrics, lodging a motion in parliament to this effect in 2010. The issue was raised again in March last year by Pishai Muchauraya who said though it had been discussed with Justice minister Patrick Chinamasa, nothing concrete had materialised. In April last year, Information Communication Technology minister Nelson Chamisa also called for the adoption of a digital biometric voters’ roll. I also brought up this issue in July last year in which I explored the basics behind biometrics technology. Most recently, calls led by Regional Integration minister Priscillah Misihairabwi-Mushonga to have online voters’ registration were rejected by the Registrar-General (RG) who contends that this does not provide adequate checks as required in Section 24 of the Electoral Act.

Virginia: Senate approves voter ID bill; separate House bill advances | The Washington Post

A GOP-sponsored bill to tighten voter identification rules cleared the Senate on Friday with help from Republican Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, who also supported a Democrat’s amendment to delay the change. But the bill, which originated in the House, now returns to the lower chamber because the Senate amended it. Also Friday, a House committee approved a separate Senate voter ID bill, which now heads to the full House. Both pieces of legislation — House Bill 1337 and Senate Bill 1256 — would remove several forms of identification, including utility bills and paychecks, that the General Assembly added last year to the list of IDs accepted at the polls. SB1256, sponsored by Sen. Mark D. Obenshain (R-Harrisonburg), would go further, requiring that voters present photo identification. Bolling, who presides over the Senate and is exploring an independent bid for governor, broke two tie votes related to HB1337, which is sponsored by Dels. Mark L. Cole (R-Spotsylvania) and Rob R. Bell III (R-Albemarle). The lieutenant governor first sided with Democrats to delay implementation until July 2014 and further specify that it not take effect until money is appropriated to educate voters about the change. But he then voted with his party to pass the underlying bill.

Virginia: Senate panel OKs more stringent voter ID | The Daily Times

The Virginia General Assembly’s Senate Privileges and Elections Committee has approved a bill that supporters say would thwart voter fraud but opponents say would make it harder to vote. The committee voted 8-6 along party lines for a bill that would limit the number of acceptable forms of voter identification — the types of documents someone must present in order to cast a ballot. Currently, voters can identify themselves by presenting a voter registration card, a driver’s license or various other documents. House Bill 1337, proposed by Delegate Mark Cole, R-Fredericksburg, would remove utility bills, bank statements and paychecks from the list of documents that would be accepted at polling places.

National: Fixing Long Lines At The Polls May Be Harder Than You Think | NPR

Minutes after he was re-elected in November, President Obama vowed to fix the long lines that many voters faced at the polls. He mentioned the problem again in his inaugural address. And now, the president is expected to raise it once more in the State of the Union address on Tuesday — this time with some possible solutions. When Obama made his initial vow after midnight on election night, some Miami polling places had just closed — after voters stood in line for six, seven, even eight hours to cast ballots. There were similar waits at other polling sites in Florida and elsewhere. “For me, who voted in the state of Maryland, I was in line for seven hours,” says Judith Browne Dianis, co-director of Advancement Project, a leading voting-rights group. Today, not all Americans have equal access to the polls, she says. “We have 13,000 election jurisdictions that run elections 13,000 different ways,” she says. “That is what we have to fix.”

North Dakota: Bill would require voters to show photo ID | The Jamestown Sun

North Dakota could go from taking people at their word on Election Day to requiring them to show a photo ID in order to vote, under a bill passed by a House committee Friday. The House Government and Veterans Affair Committee gave a do-pass recommendation to House Bill 1332 after the bill sponsor, Rep. Randy Boehning, R-Fargo, vice-chair of the committee, “hoghoused” his original bill, stripping it of its old language and adding new language to include the identification requirement. It also has a provision that the state would provide an ID card at no cost to an eligible voter without a driver’s license. The bill was passed out of committee with the amendment quickly, which concerned committee member Rep. Marie Strinden, D-Grand Forks. Strinden said the new language of the bill doesn’t address identification issues concerning college students, elderly or homeless individuals.

Palestine: Election commission starts updating voter registers, paving way for elections | Fox News

The Palestinian election commission has started to update voter registers in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to pave the way for new elections — and reconciliation between the rival Fatah and Hamas factions. Monday’s registration drive is taking place both in the Hamas-run Gaza Strip and the West Bank, which is governed by the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority. The election commission says voter registration will continue until Feb. 18.

Iowa: Voter registration form legality questioned | SFGate

The attorney for one of a handful of Iowa residents charged for allegedly registering to vote when they weren’t U.S. citizens is focusing on a small technicality. Something too small, he argues. David Richter said Thursday that under state law, Iowa’s voter registration form must have the same size and color of font throughout. But he argues that the text is smaller in the section of the form where residents are asked to sign their names to certify their U.S. citizenship. “I had a font expert measure it and certify that they violated that section of the Iowa code,” the lawyer explained. “I believe the judge will find the form on its face is illegal.” Richter is representing 51-year-old Albert Harte-Maxwell, who along with his wife, Linda, and another Pottawattamie County resident were charged in September with election misconduct and fraudulent practice.

National: ‘We have to fix that’: Obama will push voting rights | MSNBC

They were five simple words in a 2,000-word speech–”We have to fix that.” But for millions of voting rights supporters across the country, they were a sign that President Obama recognized one of the major struggles of the modern civil rights movement, as activists and some Democrats push back against an onslaught of voter suppression tactics that dampen turnout among Democratic constituencies. Another sign of the president’s support for voting reforms came on Inauguration Day, when he said, “Our journey is not complete until no citizen is forced to wait for hours to exercise the right to vote.” The third, and perhaps most vociferous call, may be only a week away, according a New York Times report that says the president will call for voting reforms in next Tuesday’s State of the Union address. The same report included an MIT analysis of voting wait times in 2012 that is likely to bolster his push for voter equality. Democrats and Independents, on average, waited about 20% longer than Republicans. Black and Hispanic voters waited nearly twice as long as white voters. Urban voters waited more than twice as long as rural voters. The poor waited longer than the rich.

South Dakota: Counties using new voter registration system | Madison Daily Leader

Counties across South Dakota are using a new system to access and update voter records. Total Vote allows county auditors instant access to changes that need to be made, from new voter registrations and pending applications to record deletions due to a death and notices of missing information with existing records. Lake County Auditor Bobbi Janke said she is just starting to use the new system, and it continues to improve every week. South Dakota Secretary of State Jason Gant said the system was created using input from auditors across the state. The goal was to create one computer system that could be used by all counties and the state. The new program is designed to communicate directly with other state departments that provide alerts related to voter records — like alerts from the state Department of Health regarding a death, which requires the removal of that voter from the active voter registration list. “It’s incorporated all of the election systems into one new system,” Gant said.

National: Voter Waiting Time Disparities Draw Democrats’ Scrutiny | NYTimes.com

With studies suggesting that long lines at the polls cost Democrats hundreds of thousands of votes in November, party leaders are beginning a push to make voting and voter registration easier, setting up a likely new conflict with Republicans over a deeply polarizing issue. White House officials have told Congressional leaders that the president plans to press for action on Capitol Hill, and Democrats say they expect him to highlight the issue in his State of the Union address next week. Democrats in the House and Senate have already introduced bills that would require states to provide online voter registration and allow at least 15 days of early voting, among other things. Fourteen states are also considering whether to expand early voting, including the battlegrounds of Florida, Ohio and Virginia, according to FairVote, a nonprofit group that advocates electoral change. Florida, New York, Texas and Washington are looking at whether to ease registration and establish preregistration for 16- and 17-year-olds.

Montana: Bill to end Election Day voter registration gets initial OK in Montana House | Missoulian

House Republicans pushed through a bill Thursday to end same-day voter registration and instead cut it off at 5 p.m. on the Friday before Election Day. House Bill 30 by Rep. Ted Washburn, R-Bozeman, passed an initial 61-39 vote, with all Republicans voting for it and all Democrats against it. The bill faces a final vote before heading to the Senate. Republicans cited long waiting lines and confusion on Election Day resulting from what’s known as “same-day voter registration” as a reason to change the 2005 state law. Democrats countered that it would deprive people of their right to vote if they learned on Election Day they weren’t registered when they thought they were. “All we’re doing is moving the registration back so that the clerk and recorder’s staff can work on the election on Election Day, and the voters, if they’re going to run through the voting process, can be moved along speedily, rather than a four- to six-hour wait,” Washburn said.