Florida: Voter-rights activists pan Florida election measure | TBO.com

For more than a decade, lawmakers have been tweaking election rules to improve on Florida’s ham-fisted history of counting ballots. This year, an election law rewrite is moving through the state House that voter-rights activists have assailed as “good old-fashioned voter suppression” and “Jim Crow tactics.”

The legislation was described as a cleanup bill in advance of the 2012 elections that is “important to ensure the integrity of the political process and our elections in Florida,” said sponsor Dennis Baxley, a Republican from Ocala.

Tennessee: Tennessee Attorney General’s Opinion Flags Voter ID Bill | Nashville Public Radio

A proposal to require Tennessee voters to present a photo ID at their polling place ran into a speed bump at the state capitol Wednesday. Tennessee’s attorney general issued an opinion saying that the Voter ID bill would likely be found unconstitutional.

Representative Craig Fitzhugh, the House Democratic Leader, was one of the lawmakers who requested the Attorney General’s opinion. “I mean it’s a violation of both the U.S. Constitution and the Tennessee Constitution.”

Florida: Critics lash Florida elections bill as ‘voter suppression’ | St. Petersburg Times

The latest House makeover of Florida election laws stirred intense controversy Thursday as unions and grass roots political groups complained that it would suppress 2012 voting in a state Barack Obama won in 2008.

By a 12-6 party-line vote, the House State Affairs Committee approved the new bill, setting up a vote by the full House. Similar legislation will be taken up Friday by the Senate Rules Committee.

Florida: Supervisor of Elections Ion Sancho: Florida Elections Bill is a Travesty

The House Republican Leadership has introduced a bill that the Leon County Supervisor of Elections calls a travesty. Proposed House Bill 1355 passed through a subcommittee Friday morning. Leon County Supervisor of Elections Ion Sancho says proposed House Bill 1355 destroys the election process as it currently exists in Florida and he went to legislators to let them know that he strongly opposes it.

Sancho shook his head at the 128-page document before heading inside the House Office Building to let the Governmental Operations Subcommittee know how he feels. But, to no avail. The subcommittee members voted in favor of proposed House Bill 1355. Sancho says he disagrees with a change that would allow the partisan appointee of the governor to control all supervisors of elections and give them orders, or remove them from office. Sancho said, “This is ridiculous. It would be as if an appointed water district commissioner could order an elected legislator around. There’s only one reason for this and that is partisan control over the process. It serves no interest of the citizens.”

Florida: Sweeping Florida elections-law overhaul clears committee | Miami Herald

Over the objections of county elections supervisors and public-interest groups, a bill that would make numerous changes to Florida’s elections law cleared a House subcommittee on Friday. The Government Operations Subcommittee voted up the bill on Friday by a party-line tally of 9-4.

Its sponsor, state Rep. Dennis Baxley, R-Ocala, said the changes will get the state’s Elections Code in “ship-shape” for the next election cycle and the redrawing of congressional and legislative district lines. “This bill preserves and protects the political process,” Baxley told the subcommittee.

National: DOJ probe says Panthers case handled appropriately | Associated Press

In a case that has drawn strong criticism from Republican conservatives, the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility has found no evidence that politics played a role when department attorneys dismissed three defendants from a voting rights lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party.

OPR, which investigates allegations of attorney misconduct, concluded that the government lawyers’ work on the lawsuit in 2009 was based on a good-faith assessment of the law and the facts and had a reasonable basis.

National: Across country, GOP pushes photo ID at the polls | The Associated Press

Empowered by last year’s elections, Republican leaders in about half the states are pushing to require voters to show photo ID at the polls despite little evidence of fraud and already-substantial punishments for those who vote illegally.

Democrats claim the moves will disenfranchise poor and minority voters — many of whom traditionally vote for their candidates. The measures will also increase spending and oversight in some states even as Republicans are focused on cutting budgets and decreasing regulations.

North Carolina: Proposed North Carolina Voter ID bill could be too costly | KTVD-TV

Legislative staff has come up with a non-partisan fiscal note on voter identification. On the high end, it shows the cost to the state could be two-and-a-half million dollars. But critics say that’s way under what other states have reported and isn’t close to what the actual cost may be. The fiscal note offers a range of what requiring voters to show identification at the polls could cost. On the low end the cost is almost $850,000, and on the high end, the cost is almost $2.5 million.

There are a lot of unknowns such as what it would cost counties. “What’s shocking about this estimate, it’s full of lines like ‘could not be determined,’ ‘could not be estimated,’ ‘was not included in this estimate,'” said Chris Kromm, Institute for Southern Studies.

Alabama: Alabama Man honored for defense of black voting rights | WSFA 12 News

Inspirational songs followed stories and memories you’d only find in history books as civil rights era icons were honored at the National Voting Rights Museum as part of the second day of the annual Bridge Crossing Jubilee. One man–John Doar–a white attorney who worked for the U.S. Department of Justice came to Selma in the 1960s to represent African Americans who were denied the right to vote.

“We did it without fear or favor. We went right down the line as law enforcement officers,” says Doar. He says whites were allowed to vote simply because they were white. But, even the most educated black person couldn’t register–which was against the law.

Texas: Texas House panel approves voter ID bill | The Dallas Morning News

Legislation that would for the first time require Texans to show a photo ID to vote was approved by a House committee on Monday and sent to the full House, where it is expected to easily pass.

The voter ID bill, which already has been approved by the Senate, was approved by the House Select Committee on Voter Identification and Voter Fraud on a 5-2 vote, with Democrats Marc Veasey of Fort Worth and Scott Hochberg of Houston casting the no votes.

New Hampshire: NH: Students decry residency voting bill | NashuaTelegraph.com

A bill to strip college students of the right to vote conforms with the Founding Fathers’ view of domicile, its lone sponsor argued Thursday. Rep. Gregory Sorg, R-Easton, said he merely wants to return residency for voting to where you came from and not where you’re attending school.

“This doesn’t take away the right to vote for anyone,” Sorg insisted. “This says you vote where you reside, and you don’t vote where you happen to spend a few years of your time but have a domicile somewhere else.”

Tennessee: Tennessee Secretary of State Tre Hargett cites people as culprits | Cleveland Daily Banner

There were no comments while Tennessee Secretary of State Tre Hargett presented a brief overview of his job — until he began talking about elections. After his speech Thursday in front of the Kiwanis Club of Cleveland, a member said the voting machines used in Tennessee do not have a recorded paper trail and could be hacked in five minutes.

“I don’t think they can be hacked in five minutes, but there is no perfect machine,” he said. “As long as we have people who want to commit fraud, they are going to find a way to commit it regardless of what kind of machine we have. Machines are not the culprit. People are the culprit” 

Editorials: Is Anyone Watching? | NYTimes.com

Two years ago, the Supreme Court looked over a cliff and decided not to jump. The question was whether a core section of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, as renewed by Congress in 2006 for another 25 years, was constitutional. A majority opinion by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. strongly suggested that it wasn’t. The section’s provisions “raise serious constitutional questions,” the chief justice said. He suggested that the administrative burdens the law places on the states where black citizens once faced nearly insurmountable obstacles to voting were no longer justified: “Things have changed in the South.”

During the April 2009 argument in the case, Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District v. Holder, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, in particular, appeared exasperated by the failure of Congress to take those changes into account when it renewed the law in the same format as the previous renewal in 1982. An iconic achievement of the civil rights era seemed headed for history’s dustbin, most likely by a vote of 5 to 4, and an anticipatory outcry began to build. But then either the chief justice or Justice Kennedy, or maybe both, blinked.