Sept. 10
“We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses,” Macomb County GOP chairman James Carabelli reportedly told the Messenger in the Sept. 10 report.
“The Macomb County party’s plans to challenge voters who have defaulted on their house payments is likely to disproportionately affect African Americans who are overwhelmingly Democratic voters,” Melzer wrote. “More than 60 percent of all sub-prime loans – the most likely kind of loan to go into default – were made to African Americans in Michigan…”
Sept. 11
In a statement, Project Vote attorney Teresa James explained that Michigan law allows challenges at the polls only if the challenger “knows or has good reason to suspect” a voter is ineligible. According to James, the Michigan Secretary of State has clarified this to require that challenges should be based on “reliable sources or means.”
“Republican challengers with only a list of foreclosure notices will have NO evidence or reliable source to suggest that eligible voters have moved and are no longer eligible to vote,” James said.
Later that day, however, Carabelli denied having any such plans, according to a Detroit News report. Despite his claim that the story was a fabrication, Melzer “stands by her story ‘100 percent’ and has clear notes on her conversation with Carabelli.”
Sept. 12
James sent a letter on behalf of Project Vote to both major political parties in Michigan, offering a detailed analysis of state and federal law and the requirements for challenging voters based on residency. In the letter, James clarified that a change of address for any reason – including losing one’s home to foreclosure – does not itself disqualify an individual from voting under Michigan law, and that challenging a voter on the basis of a foreclosure would violate the National Voter Registration Act and the Voting Rights Act.
Sept. 16
The Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee filed a lawsuit on behalf of the potentially disenfranchised foreclosure victims, according to Greg Gordon of McClatchy Newspapers.
“Democratic lawyers argued that foreclosure proceedings can take more than a year and don’t always force a homeowner to change residences,” Gordon wrote. “Nor is there a basis, they wrote, ‘for challenging the right to vote of all the renters who reside in an apartment building that has been foreclosed.’
“They said the tactic is intended ‘to discourage, intimidate and suppress the vote of individuals whom defendant Republicans believe are unlikely to vote for them.'”
A spokesman for the state Republican Party denied the plan to use foreclosure lists to challenge voters and claimed that they “never talked about doing it,” Gordon wrote.
The same day, “a group of Senate Democrats — including Sen. Obama — sent a letter to Attorney General Michael Mukasey asking for details on what the Justice Department plans to do to ensure voters aren’t ‘intimidated or harassed based solely on the fact that they have received a foreclosure notice,'” according to the Wall Street Journal.
“Peter Carr, a Justice Department spokesman, said the department ‘is aware of the allegations and is currently reviewing the matter.'”
Sept. 19
U.S. Sen. John Conyers (D-Mich.) asked the McCain campaign to “‘repudiate any efforts of the Republican Party and any of its state affiliates to engage in voter suppression and intimidation tactics,'” relating directly to the Sept. 10 report on caging foreclosure victims in Macomb County, Mich., according to a blog post in The Hill.
“‘It is beyond disgraceful that the Republican Party now seems to be targeting those who are suffering the most,’ Conyers said.’ It appears that individuals who can’t recall how many houses they own don’t understand how awful it is to lose your home to foreclosure, and don’t know that you don’t need to own property to vote in the United States of America.'”
Conyers’ anti-caging bill, Caging Prohibition Act of 2008 (H 5038) has not moved in Congress since January.
Sept. 24
Congressional members and acting assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Civil Rights division, Grace Chung Becker discussed the Michigan voter caging scheme during a joint hearing of the House Judiciary and Administration committees, according to Jonathan Kaplan of the Michigan Messenger.
Becker said that if allegations of voter caging foreclosure victims were true, “it would be a concern to us in the Civil Rights Division.” She also noted that criminal prosecutors from the DOJ would not monitor polling stations this year.
That same day, the Michigan House Democrats announced the introduction of a plan “that protects the right to vote for residents who have received a foreclosure notice.” The plan is currently in the Senate, according to the House Democrats news release.
In Ohio, Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner also took action to protect the rights of low-income voters in that state. On Sept. 24, Brunner issued a directive to county boards of election stating that they “may not cancel an Ohioan’s voter registration based solely on the fact that the person is involved in a foreclosure process.” Brunner instructed boards that they must comply with the requirements of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), which says a voter’s registration can only be canceled due to residency if the voter confirms such a change in writing, or if the voter fails to respond to a forwardable notice and fails to vote in two subsequent federal elections.
Picking up on the severity of the voting rights issue and how it may impact national turnout in November, Ian Urbina of the New York Times reported how “federal election officials say they are concerned that voters are not being properly informed of how to update their addresses – a problem that may lead to the loss of thousands of votes.
The number of people who move “due to foreclosure or any other reason” exceeds the number of people who notified the election boards.” According to Urbina, 375,000 Ohio residents filed for a change of address with the U.S. Postal Service, but only 24,000 updated their voter registration information. Similarly, in Missouri, 250,000 people notified the Postal Service of their move, but only 22,000 told the election board.
Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri and Ohio sent notices to residents in select counties who have filed for change of address, but did not update voter registration, Urbina wrote.
On Sept. 24 Project Vote sent letters to the DNC and the RNC, as well as to Secretaries of State, Attorneys-General, and state party chairs in key states where we are conducting voter registration work and fear large numbers of low-income voters could be susceptible to similar caging tactics, including Ariz., Colo., Fla., N.M., Penn., Nev., N.C., Va., Ohio, Md., Mo. and Ga.. Project Vote also sent a letter to the Department of Justice, outlining the legal ramifications of this and other voter caging operations, and demanding investigation and prosecution of acts that violate voter rights under the Voting Rights Act, the National Voter Registration Act, and other federal laws.
Sept. 26
The Washington Post reported that Maryland Attorney General Douglas Gansler instructed the state and local election officials to ensure that voters who have lost their homes to foreclosures are aware that they have not lost their right to vote.
“Terry Speigner, chairman of the Democratic Central Committee in Prince George’s County, said his phone ‘has been burning up’ with calls about the rumor in Maryland,” according to Post writer, Ovetta Wiggins.
“A foreclosure is not a valid basis on which to challenge a registered voter at the polls,” Gansler wrote in the letter to officials.
As we were following the voter caging story in Michigan, the Republican National Committee decided to heighten their attack on the nation’s largest nonpartisan voter registration drive and its connection to presidential candidate Barrack Obama – another voter suppression effort that could create an atmosphere of fear and intimidation at the polls, according a Sept. 28 NPR report by Pam Fessler.
