voters – R&R – Reachout and Rebuild

As Election Day nears, President Trump has increasingly threatened to instigate voter intimidation. First, he has insinuated that he will deploy law enforcement officers or call up the National Guard to root out election-related crimes at the polls or call up the National Guard. (Spoiler alert: voter fraud is vanishingly rare). The president has abused his authority over law enforcement before, most notably when he deployed federal agents — and threatened to deploy the military — in response to domestic protests earlier this summer.

On top of this, in the first nationally televised presidential debate the president called for his supporters to “go into the polls and watch very carefully,” especially in Philadelphia. The Republican National Committee (RNC) claims to be gearing up for an aggressive “ballot security” operation involving 50,000 poll watchers, which many worry could include plans to intimidate voters. In 2017 a court freed the RNC from a 35-year-old consent decree that required the committee to obtain judicial approval of any such operations to ensure that they would not illegally intimidate or discriminate against voters or interfere with their right to vote.

There is a shameful history in parts of the country of armed officers, on duty or off, targeting Black voters and other voters of color for intimidation. Their mere presence in polling places could raise reasonable fears among groups that are frequently the target of racial profiling and police misconduct.

But the law is crystal clear: it is illegal to deploy federal troops or armed federal law enforcement officers to any polling place. State and local laws and practices place limits on the role of law enforcement and poll watchers. And a host of federal and state laws, many of which also carry severe criminal penalties, prevent anyone — whether a law enforcement officer or a vigilante — from harassing or intimidating voters.

The U.S. Military

Bottom Line: It would be illegal — and in many cases a federal crime — for the president to deploy the military to interfere with the election.

The Concern: President Trump has threatened to deploy the military to U.S. cities in response to protests; these threats have often been linked to his partisan attacks on Democratic mayors and governors. Although Trump has not explicitly said he would deploy troops to the polls, his threats to send in law enforcement echo his recent response to those protests. These threats, and Trump’s politicization of the military in other contexts, recently prompted two members of Congress to ask Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley whether he would obey an order to send active duty military to polling places.

Why It’s Illegal: Any deployment of troops or other armed federal agents to a polling place is a federal crime (unless the country is literally being invaded). The law, which dates back to 1948, says:

Whoever, being an officer of the Army or Navy, or other person in the civil, military, or naval service of the United States, orders, brings, keeps, or has under his authority or control any troops or armed men at any place where a general or special election is held, unless such force be necessary to repel armed enemies of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both; and be disqualified from holding any office of honor, profit, or trust under the United States. footnote1_pbthrbt 1

Other federal statutes also prohibit the military from interfering in our elections. footnote2_9e40ia2 2 And the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 bars troops from being deployed on U.S. soil generally. footnote3_kdryp8q 3 There are exceptions to the law that Trump has tried to exploit, but they do not allow him to circumvent the explicit prohibition on using the military to interfere in elections.

In short, the president cannot deploy the military for any purpose connected to an election. The military knows this. A 2018 Defense Department directive confirms that military personnel “will not conduct operations at polling places.” footnote4_4asq9ar 4 Likewise, when asked by the two members of Congress whether he would send troops to polling places, General Milley made clear, “I do not see the U.S. Military as part of this process.” Any officers who try to cross this line could be prosecuted.

The Department of Homeland Security

Bottom Line: As with the military, it would be a crime for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to deploy any of its agents — including those from the Federal Protective Service, Customs and Border Protection, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) — in connection with an election.

The Concern: Over the summer, in response to civil unrest accompanying the wave of peaceful protests that followed the murder of George Floyd, the Trump administration recklessly deployed agents from the Federal Protective Service and Customs and Border Protection to Portland, Oregon, and other U.S. cities over the objections of state and local officials (a number of whom have filed lawsuits that are pending in federal court). The administration claimed that the agents had been deployed only to protect federal property, but they allegedly assaulted protesters and carried out arrests far from federal buildings. This history, coupled with the president’s recent threats, raises understandable fears that DHS forces might be deployed to intimidate voters.

False rumors are also now spreading about plans for ICE agents to patrol the vicinity of polling places and even arrest voters they suspect of being undocumented. Some of these rumors appear to have come from groups that are intentionally trying to suppress the vote among Latinos and other people of color. These rumors create real fear in communities ICE has targeted with increasingly aggressive tactics.

Why It’s Illegal: Any deployment of DHS agents in the vicinity of a polling place or any place where votes are being counted would violate the same criminal statute that applies to all armed federal officers. The Department of Justice’s own election crimes manual confirms that the statute bars any armed federal agent from election sites. footnote5_a81tngb 5 Indeed, when asked about the president’s threat to send agents to the polls, the acting head of DHS responded point-blank: “We don’t have any authority to do that at the department.”

It is also illegal for anyone to intimidate or threaten voters, disenfranchise voters, or target voters based on their race or ethnicity — federal agents included. The use of federal agents to intimidate voters is a crime under section 11 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA). footnote6_kr4w7zk 6 Courts have held that the law forbids tactics such as following alleged suspects, recording license plate numbers, and brandishing weapons. footnote7_ojs1pyq 7 The consequence for an intentional violation? Up to five years in prison. footnote8_zt6hq83 8

Federal law also makes it a crime for people (including government officials) to conspire to deprive someone of the right to vote or the right to be free from discrimination. footnote9_eg4sn4p 9 For this offense, violators face up to 10 years in prison. The Constitution too prohibits government officials (including ICE and other federal agents) from targeting voters of color for enforcement actions. footnote10_sd5sjdy 10

Even aggressive DHS operations unconnected to an election may be out of bounds during the election. The Constitution limits otherwise legal federal law enforcement activities if they interfere with areas of fundamental state concern. For example, federal courts have blocked ICE agents from entering state judicial facilities to arrest undocumented immigrants because it disrupts states’ ability to operate their own court systems. footnote11_t4jfary 11 The same logic would bar operations by ICE (or other parts of DHS) that could significantly interfere with a state’s ability to conduct a free and fair general election. footnote12_cq1hexe 12

The Department of Justice

Bottom Line: At the polls, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is limited to observing elections for compliance with federal voting rights laws for subsequent enforcement efforts. It cannot interfere with the voting process or send agents to investigate other laws.

The Concern: Attorney General Barr, who has frequently repeated the president’s lies about purported voter fraud, has asserted the right to send DOJ agents to the polls for a variety of reasons, including to investigate potential election crimes. His statements, coupled with the president’s own threats to have U.S. attorneys at the polls, have led to fears that Trump and Barr will seek to use DOJ’s authority to meddle in the election.

Why It’s Illegal: DOJ is subject to the same restrictions as other federal agencies, including the absolute bar on deploying armed agents to polling places or other locations where an election is being held. As the department’s own election crimes manual states, prosecutors have “no authority to send FBI special agents or [U.S. marshals] to polling places.” footnote13_2dadkyu 13 Even investigative activities anywhere near polling places require special permission. footnote14_o5e05w5 14

In short, Attorney General Barr, to the extent that he is asserting a right to deploy armed agents to the polls or other election-related sites while voting is ongoing, is simply wrong. If he did try to send armed agents to polling places during an election to investigate potential crimes or “enforce civil rights” (two pretexts he’s mentioned), he would be committing a federal crime. Legitimate election crime investigations should be conducted only after voting is complete, as typically happens, including most recently in the wake of revelations of absentee ballot tampering by a GOP operative in a 2018 North Carolina congressional race. Election Day disturbances should be handled by state officials.

While armed DOJ agents are not allowed at the polls, the department may under certain circumstances send unarmed representatives under its election observation and monitoring programs. These unarmed civilian federal employees are tasked only with observing and monitoring voting processes for compliance with the federal Voting Rights Act and the Help America Vote Act and reporting back to a court or DOJ’s Civil Rights Division. footnote15_9h3i7qb 15 They have no power to enforce the law. footnote16_6wy6jf0 16 In fact, monitors do not even have the authority to enter polling places without permission from state or local election officials. footnote17_76gi9yx 17 The federal observer program, which was severely limited by a Supreme Court decision that gutted a core provision of the Voting Rights Act, footnote18_6k9uh36 18 is now restricted to a small number of places where a court has ordered it (right now, just Evergreen, Alabama, and Pasadena, Texas). footnote19_5nx244x 19

State and Local Law Enforcement

Bottom Line: State and local law enforcement can sometimes be at polling places, but never under orders from the president and always subject to numerous restrictions.

The Concern: The president’s threat to send law enforcement to the polls included local officials such as sheriffs. Even without such threats, the long history of discriminatory policing and official voter suppression in many places provides ample reason to worry that the presence of any law enforcement at the polls may intimidate some voters, especially voters of color.

What’s Legal and What Isn’t: The federal government, including the president, has no authority whatsoever over state and local law enforcement, footnote20_eszyxqh 20 and certainly no power to call them to the polls.

State and local law enforcement officers may have the right to be at the polls for the purpose of helping election officials ensure a safe voting environment. If, for example, private citizens try to interfere with the right to vote, election officials may call law enforcement in to protect the public and ensure no one is deterred from voting.

But there are a variety of legal restrictions placed on state and local law enforcement. In some states, including Pennsylvania and California, officers who show up to the polls without being called there by election officials have committed a crime. footnote21_bennng3 21 In a number of other states, including Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, and Wisconsin, officers at the polls must obey orders from election officials. footnote22_iy8omtz 22 And under no circumstances may state or local police intimidate voters, prevent people from voting, or target particular racial or ethnic groups. These are all violations of federal law. footnote23_1nnbis9 23 Many states also have their own robust voting rights protections. footnote24_lxctrkk 24

In practice, election officials and law enforcement typically develop plans ahead of elections to ensure that voting processes will be orderly and fair, including through intrastate working groups coordinated by election officials to game out and plan for a variety of scenarios.

The National Guard

Bottom Line: The president cannot deploy armed National Guard units to the polls or exert any control over units at the polls. There are also limits on states’ use of the National Guard, including the general prohibitions on intimidation and discrimination.

The Concern: As with the military and federal law enforcement, President Trump has misused his authority over the National Guard. His June deployment of eleven states’ guard units to counter protests in Washington, DC, was widely criticized. Given this history and the president’s recent statements, some worry about guard units being deployed to harass or intimidate voters or election officials.

What’s Legal and What Isn’t: National Guard units under federal command are part of the U.S. military, footnote25_x0jejnn 25 and so deploying them to the polls would be a federal crime, just like it would be for the other military branches. Moreover, using them for law enforcement purposes would in most circumstances violate the Posse Comitatus Act.

These prohibitions do not apply to guard units under the command of a state government. Some states, however, have laws of their own prohibiting the deployment of guard units to the polls. In California, for example, it is a misdemeanor for active-duty guard members (like other law enforcement officers) to enter voting locations in many circumstances. footnote26_u2gott0 26 In every state, guard units under state command are also subject to the same federal and state voting rights and antidiscrimination laws as state and local law enforcement, which means that they would be subject to criminal penalties for voter intimidation or other forms of election interference.

During the primaries, in the face of a nationwide poll worker shortage due to Covid-19, several states did deploy guard units to serve as emergency election workers. Those units were generally unarmed and served as ordinary poll workers or performed other administrative tasks. Such a deployment, while appropriate in the case of last-minute emergencies, is generally a last resort; during the primaries the deployments came at the request and direction of election officials. There should be less need for similar deployments this November, as election officials have been working hard to recruit new poll workers. (In the event that guard members are needed to fill staffing gaps, they should wear civilian clothes and their duties should be limited to those of poll workers.)

Guard units may also be deployed in “hybrid” status, in which they serve a federal mission set by the president or secretary of defense (and are paid with federal funds) while remaining under state command and control. footnote27_s9kbqz7 27 State governors, however, must consent to use their guards for the mission in question. footnote28_s8wkfyd 28 Moreover, guard units in this status arguably act under the authority of the president or secretary of defense and therefore would still be subject to the criminal prohibition on federal military officers stationing “armed men” at the polls. Guard units in hybrid status are still subject to state laws limiting their use at polling stations, as well as all federal and state voting rights and antidiscrimination laws.

Off-Duty Law Enforcement

Bottom Line: Off-duty members of the military, National Guard, and law enforcement are entitled to vote in person, serve as poll workers, and engage in other democratic activities at the polls, but they must follow the same rules as other members of the general public.

The Concern: Decades ago, the Republican Party recruited off-duty police officers to show up to the polls armed and wearing official-looking uniforms to engage in so-called “ballot security” efforts targeting Black and Latino communities. As a result of the Democratic Party suing to challenge the practice, the GOP’s operations were monitored by a federal court for 35 years. In 2017 the court order that provided for that monitoring expired. This year, in the lead-up to the first presidential election free from such oversight, the Republican National Committee is reportedly preparing to send out tens of thousands of poll watchers. The concern is that history will repeat itself.

What’s Legal and What Isn’t: Poll watchers are allowed to monitor elections in most states. Off-duty military members and law enforcement may generally take part in such activities, and of course may also be at the polls to vote themselves.

But, as noted, voter intimidation and discrimination are illegal and often criminal. Many laws, such as the VRA, apply to private as well as governmental actors, and so would cover individuals who are off duty and acting in their personal capacities.

Many states also flatly prohibit openly carrying a gun into a polling place. footnote29_fcz7waj 29 Some states, including Texas, prohibit carrying concealed weapons as well. footnote30_odelmpa 30 Many states prohibit weapons in specific types of polling places, such as government buildings. footnote31_kifh1gz 31 Others have specific rules against brandishing a firearm in a way that could intimidate voters. footnote32_htpn1zt 32

The tactics that the RNC used to intimidate Black and Latino voters are just as illegal today as they were in the 1980s. Anyone who knowingly engages in such tactics can and should face legal consequences.

Private Militias and other Vigilante Poll Watchers

Bottom Line: Voter intimidation by poll watchers is illegal, and there are legal restrictions on who can engage in poll watching and rules in place to ensure accountability.

The Concern: During the first presidential debate, President Trump called for his “supporters to go into the polls and watch very carefully,” and specifically suggested that they do so in Philadelphia. In the same debate, he told the Proud Boys, a violent extremist organization, to “stand by.” Especially in light of the expiration of the consent decree restricting the Republican Party’s “ballot security” operations, these statements have led to concerns of vigilante poll watchers engaging in voter intimidation.

Why It’s Illegal: Not just anyone can show up and watch the polls. Most states limit who can serve as a poll watcher, often to appointed representatives of a candidate or a party and, in some cases, to neutral, nonpartisan observers. In some states, such as Pennsylvania, poll watchers must be registered to vote in the county where they seek to observe the polls. These limits help deter misconduct and ensure accountability. In addition to limiting who can serve as a poll watcher, most states have strict limits on what poll watchers can do. States including Georgia, Florida, and Michigan prohibit poll watchers from speaking to voters. footnote33_n5tpzya 33 Many states allow poll watchers to challenge voter eligibility, but they must follow specified procedural and substantive limits. Poll watchers who abuse their roles may be ejected from the polling place.

State and local laws also restrict armed militias from appearing at the polls. Most states have laws or constitutional provisions prohibiting private groups from engaging in unauthorized paramilitary or law enforcement activities. Georgetown Law School’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection (ICAP) published a 50-state guide documenting the laws that state and local governments can use to stop private militias from engaging in paramilitary activities in public spaces. footnote34_p5qp5pj 34

Armed groups or individuals who claim to offer security services at polling stations will also be in violation of state and local laws. Virtually all states have laws that strictly regulate the provision of private security services, particularly armed security services. These laws typically establish licensing and firearms-permitting procedures to ensure security guards are properly vetted, trained, and insured. Depending on the state, providing security services without a license can result in civil fines and/or criminal penalties. footnote35_7098qfq 35

Even apart from all of these limits, both federal and state laws outlaw voter intimidation and conspiracies to prevent eligible Americans from voting, and election officials are prepared to respond and remove bad actors. State and local election officials also have plans and protocols in place to address any disruptions at the polls. Most have strengthened those plans as the threat level has increased. They will not be caught off guard.

Conclusion

Federal and state laws clearly prohibit any deployment of the military, law enforcement, or vigilantes to the polls to intimidate voters or engage in any operation unrelated to maintaining the peace while elections are being held. The president’s suggestions that law enforcement should act inappropriately or that vigilantes will storm the polls are simply designed to discourage voters, particularly voters of color, from voting and to undermine faith in our elections. It is important to call out Trump’s comments for what they are: not just calls for illegal action but also attempts at voter suppression. Voters should not be intimidated.

Endnotes

footnote1_pbthrbt 1. 18 U.S.C. § 592.
footnote2_9e40ia2 2. See 18 U.S.C. § 593 (punishing any officer of the military who seeks to “prescribe or fix . . . voter qualifications,” intimidate voters, or impose election regulations on a state “different from those prescribed by law”); 52 U.S.C. 10102 (“No officer of the Army, Navy, or Air Force of the United States shall prescribe or fix, or attempt to prescribe or fix, by proclamation, order, or otherwise, the qualifications of voters in any State, or in any manner interfere with the freedom of any election in any State, or with the exercise of the free right of suffrage in any State.”).
footnote3_kdryp8q 3. 18 U.S.C. § 1385.
footnote4_4asq9ar 4. U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA), Directive No. 3025.18, Mar. 19, 2018, 7, https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodd/302518p.pdf?v.
footnote5_a81tngb 5. Richard C. Pilger, ed., Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses, 8th ed., U.S. Department of Justice, December 2017, 9, https://www.justice.gov/criminal/file/1029066/download.
footnote6_kr4w7zk 6. 52 U.S.C. § 10101(b) (2018); see also 18 U.S.C. § 594 (2018) (“Whoever intimidates, threatens, coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose . . . shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”).
footnote7_ojs1pyq 7. Democratic National Committee v. Republican National Committee, No. 81-3876 (DRD) (NJ 2009).
footnote8_zt6hq83 8. 52 U.S.C. § 10308.
footnote9_eg4sn4p 9. 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3).
footnote10_sd5sjdy 10. U.S. Const. Amend. I, V, XV.
footnote11_t4jfary 11. See, e.g., State v. U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement, 431 F.Supp.3d 377, 392 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
footnote12_cq1hexe 12. One note of caution: if ICE agents try something illegal, poll workers and others should not take it upon themselves to call them on it. Anyone who tries to prevent an ICE agent from apprehending someone who may be in the United States unlawfully can themselves be held criminally liable, even if the agent is acting illegally. Anyone who witnesses ICE agents near the polls should immediately contact state and local election officials and immigrant and voting rights organizations — including by calling 866.OUR.VOTE, a nonpartisan voter protection hotline staffed by trained volunteers.
footnote13_2dadkyu 13. Pilger, Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses, 9.
footnote14_o5e05w5 14. Pilger, Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses, 9.
footnote15_9h3i7qb 15. Pilger, Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses, 85–86; and 52 U.S.C. §§ 10302(a), 10305(d).
footnote16_6wy6jf0 16. Pilger, Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses, 85n40.
footnote17_76gi9yx 17. U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, An Assessment of Minority Voting Rights Access in the United States, 2018, 268, https://www.usccr.gov/pubs/2018/Minority_Voting_Access_2018.pdf; cf. 52 U.S.C. § 10305(d) (authority to enter polling places granted to observers).
footnote18_6k9uh36 18. See Shelby County, Ala. v. Holder, 570 U.S. 529, 557 (2013) (declaring coverage formula in 52 U.S.C. § 10303(b)); and 52 U.S.C. § 10305 (providing for observers in jurisdictions covered by the formula in § 10303(b)).
footnote19_5nx244x 19. Patino v. City of Pasadena, 230 F. Supp. 3d 667, 729-30 (S.D. Tex. 2017); and Allen v. City of Evergreen, Civil No. 13-107, 2014 WL 12607819, * 2 (S.D. Ala. Jan. 13, 2014).
footnote20_eszyxqh 20. Printz v. U.S., 521 U.S. 898, 935 (1997) (“The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program.”); see also New York v. U.S., 505 U.S. 144, 188 (1992).
footnote21_bennng3 21. 25 Pa. Stat. and Cons. Stat. Ann. § 3520 (West 2020); Cal. Elec. Code § 18544 (West 2020); John Tanner, “Effective Monitoring of Polling Places,” Baylor Law Review 61 (2009), 60–61.
footnote22_iy8omtz 22. Fla. Stat. Ann. § 102.031(2) (West 2019); N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 163-48 (West 2020); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 3501.33 (West 2020); and Wis. Stat. Ann. § 7.37(2) (West 2020).
footnote23_1nnbis9 23. 42 U.S.C. § 1983; 18 U.S.C. § 594.
footnote24_lxctrkk 24. See, e.g., Fla. Stat. Ann. §104.0615 (West 2020); Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. § 168.733 (West 2020); Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 293.710.
footnote25_x0jejnn 25. 10 U.S.C. §§ 10105, 10106 (2018) (“The Army National Guard while in the service of the United States is a component of the Army.”). Note that parallel statutes apply to the Air Force National Guard.
footnote26_u2gott0 26. California makes it a felony for any “person in possession of a firearm or any uniformed peace officer, private guard, or security personnel or any person who is wearing a uniform . . . in the immediate vicinity of . . . a polling place without written authorization of the appropriate city or county elections official.” Cal. Elec. Code § 18544 (West 2020); and Tanner, “Effective Monitoring of Polling Places,” 60–61.
footnote27_s9kbqz7 27. See, e.g., 32 U.S.C. § 502(f).
footnote28_s8wkfyd 28. See 32 U.S.C. § 502(f) (providing for duty on “operations or missions undertaken by the member’s unit at the request of the President or Secretary of Defense”).
footnote29_fcz7waj 29. National Conference of State Legislatures, “Polling Places,” Aug. 18, 2020, https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/polling-places.aspx.
footnote30_odelmpa 30. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 46.03(a)(2) (West 2020).
footnote31_kifh1gz 31. Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “Location Restrictions,” accessed Sept. 28, 2020, https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws/policy-areas/guns-in-public/location-restrictions/.
footnote32_htpn1zt 32. See, e.g., Pennsylvania Department of State, “Guidance on Rules in Effect at the Polling Place on Election Day,” 2016, 3 https://www.dos.pa.gov/VotingElections/OtherServicesEvents/Documents/DOS%20GUIDANCE%20ON%20RULES%20IN%20EFFECT%20AT%20THE%20POLLING%20PLACE%20ON%20ELECTION%20DAY%2010-16.pdf (“Individuals inside or outside the polling place who behave aggressively with a firearm or who ostentatiously demonstrate that they are carrying a firearm and that behavior either is intended to or has the effect of intimidating voters will be removed, reported to the appropriate authorities for investigation and prosecution.”).
footnote33_n5tpzya 33. Ga. Code Ann. § 21-2-408(d); Fla. Stat. Ann. § 101.131(1); and Michigan Department of State Bureau of Elections, The Appointment, Rights and Duties of Election Challengers and Poll Watchers (Sept. 2020), 12, https://www.michigan.gov/documents/SOS_ED_2_CHALLENGERS_77017_7.pdf.
footnote34_p5qp5pj 34. “Prohibiting Private Armies at Public Rallies: A Catalogue of Relevant State Constitutional and Statutory Provisions,” Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, September 2020, https://www.law.georgetown.edu/icap/wp-content/uploads/sites/32/2018/04/Prohibiting-Private-Armies-at-Public-Rallies.pdf. ICAP has also published fact sheets for every state with recommendations for the public regarding what to do when private militias are observed near polling places. “State Fact Sheets,” Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection website, https://www.law.georgetown.edu/icap/our-work/addressing-the-rise-of-unlawful-private-paramilitaries/state-fact-sheets/.
footnote35_7098qfq 35. Links to each state’s licensing procedures and regulations can be found at websites promoting security guard licensing and training courses, such as securityguard-license.org and securityguardtraining.com.

Voter Outreach 2020 – Postcards To Voters

David Posnett — Fri, 24 Jul 2020 18:49:59 +0000

Turning Out The Vote In Battleground States Will Decide This Election: Learn About Handwritten Postcards To Voters (the first in a 3-part series on non in-person voter outreach)

Over the July 4^th weekend, in two speeches, Trump laid bare the blatant racism and divisiveness that are the underpinnings of his personality, his presidency and the rationale for his reelection campaign. No dog whistles, no code words, no nuance. It was deeply disturbing. He wants to bait us into a race war where, he believes, he will emerge the winner. He has no interest in uniting, no interest in soothing the frayed nerves of an anxious nation. That was left to Vice President Biden in his comments on the meaning of Independence Day in 2020. The choice between the two men could not be starker.

The weekend heightened my own sense of urgency about the 2020 election. And it reminded me of the message President Obama conveyed on the virtual fundraiser for Biden a few weeks ago: “Whatever you have done so far is not enough.”

I have been muttering this sentiment to myself since election night, 2016. I didn’t do enough to help elect Hillary. I should have done more to flip our district in 2018. And now, stuck at home, how the heck am I going to get-out-the-vote for Joe Biden this year?

Trump and the GOP know there is only one formula that leads to him winning reelection. He deployed it in 2016. Trumpism does not have the support of the majority of the country. He can only win if he suppresses the Democratic vote, through outright voter suppression and by smearing his opponent, and then he has to rile his base to such a fever pitch that nearly 100% of his 40% of the country cast their ballots. That is how he eked out an Electoral College win in 2016 and that is his plan for 2020. In 2016, he used immigration as red meat to inflame his base; this time he is using fear of our fellow Americans. It may be disgusting, but if Democrats don’t vote, then it could succeed.

In my book, The Resistance and Me: An Insider’s Account of the Two-Year Mission to Stop the Trump Agenda and Take Back the House, the reader learns, just as we learned, the incredible importance of speaking directly to voters. Across the country, in-person canvassing helped to power the blue wave. We cannot meet voters face-to-face this year, making turning out the vote just a little bit harder, but that doesn’t mean we don’t have weapons in our arsenal, other ways of reaching voters that will boost Democratic turnout. I implore each of you to learn about them and start using them because whatever you are already doing, it is not enough.

There are basically three forms of non in-person voter outreach: snail mail with letters or postcards, phone-banking and text-banking. Over the next few weeks, I will focus on each of these. Each method can be done from your own home, each is available to everyone. You can try them all and choose the method that you are most comfortable with; you can do a combination of two or three. Once you learn about these initiatives, my hope is you will be ready to get started. None of us want to wake up on November 4^th and have any regrets, or say to ourselves, as we did in 2016, if only I had gotten more involved. Because the truth about Trump, the truth that was there for us all to see in 2016, is he is unfit for this job and the combination of incompetence and corruption that mark his administration is literally killing us. We will not survive a second term.

To begin, this blog post will take a look at handwritten postcards to voters. I first got involved in mailing postcards to voters for the midterm election with my Indivisible group, East End Action Network (EEAN). We hosted a lot of activities for the midterm election, including one-on-one interviews and debate forums with the primary candidates as well as get-out-the-vote door-knocking weekends. But probably our most popular general election events were a series of postcard-writing parties, in conjunction with the campaign of our Democratic congressional nominee, Perry Gershon. They provided the postcards and the mailing lists of Democratic voters’ names and addresses and together with other grassroots groups who did the same, thousands of handwritten postcards were mailed out to voters in CD#1 right before the election. The idea is that when a voter receives a handwritten message about voting that it cuts through all the noise and clutter to make an impression. The goal is to create a card so engaging, so colorful that it will go up on a refrigerator door.

In my book are descriptions and photos of our 2018 postcard parties. People who wanted to get involved but were not comfortable going door-to-door or even phone-banking, were thrilled to participate and really enjoyed the experience. EEAN provided all the markers and stickers to make the cards creative and colorful, and everyone brought food and drinks to make it a party. Our master at organizing these events is leadership member Sharon Adams, a retired elementary school teacher.

Already this year, Sharon has organized two postcard-writing events for EEAN, both of them virtual. The first was for Common Cause to alert New York voters about their options to vote in the primary and the second was our first event reaching outside of New York, to voters in a battleground state. We have known that 2020 would be very different than 2018 because we would be adding involvement with the presidential election along with the congressional. Unlike our congressional race, the presidential race will not be decided by who gets the most votes, but by who reaches 270 electoral votes. Trump lost the popular vote, but won the presidency by small margins across a few states. Most states, including New York, are already in the red or blue column which means that voters in a handful of states, called swing states or battleground states will decide the outcome of this election. Given that, it is crucial that we reach these voters and encourage them to vote for Biden.

In researching the different groups that are involved in sending postcards to battleground states, we chose Postcards To Voters (PTV), https://postcardstovoters.org/. This was an easy decision since Sharon was already very familiar with how PTV works because she has been involved with PTV from its inception. Alongside all of the activities she is involved in for our district, she explained why being an active volunteer with PTV has been important to her.

“Volunteers feel that the stakes are so high that they have to do something to assure that our democracy will survive,” she said. “Volunteering to write friendly handwritten reminders to targeted voters has become a movement thanks to Tony McMullin, who founded Postcards to Voters in 2017. I’m proud to have been a part of this grassroots group of volunteers since its start.”

Founder Tony McMullin goes by the nickname Tony the Democrat. The website has a photo of Tony, along with an explanation of how his background led him to create PTV:

Since March 2017, many people have called me Tony The Democrat.

I have a career in business process and technology project management for specialized insurance and financial services companies. Since 2003, I have had the privilege to work on numerous municipal and state campaigns coordinating volunteers, field operations, and data-driven decisions.

While in Dallas, Texas, I was a founding member of a grassroots group that turned a red house district blue, and served as both a Precinct Chair and House District Coordinator responsible for recruiting, training, and mentoring Precinct Captains. This experience with campaigns and volunteer coordination are the foundation for my new initiative.

I live in Metro Atlanta with two rescue Miniature Schnauzers, Lex and Pierce.

Tony was first bitten by the campaign bug when he quit his job to volunteer full-time for Howard Dean’s campaign in the 2004 presidential election. There is a great profile of Tony on the website New Faces of Democracy, a group that spotlights many of the grassroots activists who are part of the anti-Trump Resistance. https://newfacesofdemocracy.org/spotlight-tony-the-democrat/.

You can also read about Tony and PTV in a 2018 article in The New York Times entitled, “Writing Postcards Brings Voters Back From the Edge: ‘It’s Sharpie Therapy’.” According to the article, “In the big data era of politics, where campaigns are betting millions on software that can harvest hundreds of pieces of information about a single voter, Tony McMullin is making a decidedly different wager. He is trying to show that elections can be won through the persuasive power of a plaintive handwritten postcard. It is a battle of quaint vs. quant.”

The home page on the PTV website is warm and welcoming and filled with photos of colorful and creative postcards. Here is the description on the PTV site of how it works:

Postcards to Voters are friendly, handwritten reminders from volunteers to targeted voters giving Democrats a winning edge in close, key races coast to coast.

What started on March 11, 2017 with sharing 5 addresses apiece to 5 volunteers on Facebook so that they could mail postcards to voters in Jon Ossoff’s race grew in one month to 1,200+ volunteers nationwide and over 51,000 postcards mailed.

Now, we consist of over 75,000+ volunteers in every state (including Alaska and Hawaii) who have written over 9 million postcards to voters in over 200 key, close elections.

We use an interactive texting service (Abby The Address Bot) to assign addresses to our trusted, returning volunteers. For new volunteers and those organizing postcard parties around the country, we use a commercial Help Desk system to streamline and automate email requests.

Another commercial business intelligence package crunches the numbers so we always know who our top volunteers are by campaign, a heat-map showing where the postcards are being written by zip code around the country, and other essential dashboards to manage an operation that now averages 15,000 voter addresses assigned daily.

How It Works

1. Sign Up

o We’ll send you an email with instructions

2. Become an Approved Writer

o Write a practice postcard and email us a photo following instructions in the email

3. Approval

o Approved -We’ll send you addresses and information on how to obtain additional addresses

o Not Approved – You will receive an email detailing why and how to fix it

4. Request Addresses

5. Keep up with Current Campaigns

o Facebook

o Twitter

We felt this group was perfect for our postcard action and we were eager to write to voters in a battleground state. Because all our meetings and events have been virtual since March, we could not provide tables of volunteers with materials as we did in 2018, but our founder, Rebecca Dolber, explained in our weekly newsletter how a virtual postcard party would work. Members were asked to RSVP with Sharon if they were interested. Sharon then followed-up in an email to those members who signed up:

Thank you for being the first group to volunteer this week to write Postcards To Voters. (PTV)

I started writing with this awesome organization when it started in 2017. There are now over 75,000 volunteers in every state that have written close to 8 million postcards to voters. (Now you’re really excited to be part of this movement!).

Postcards To Voters are friendly, handwritten reminders from volunteers to targeted voters giving Democrats a winning edge in close, key races coast to coast. After you become an approved writer you may be able to choose the target group you want to write to (depends on the addresses available) and you choose how many cards you want to write (you are usually given 3 days to complete/send). I like to do 5 or 10 at a time. Aside from that, you are given everything you need. There are only 3 MUST HAVES for each card, tons of extra ideas, background information and of course the addresses.

I’m going to give you the link to get SIGNED UP and then you’ll receive an email with exact instructions. On the website, https://postcardstovoters.org/, go to JOIN in the menu. After you’ve sent the photo of your practice postcard and been approved, you’ll receive additional instructions on how to request addresses whenever you feel the urge to write. I am here to help with any questions. The website is awesome! It’s very complete, so take some time to explore the site.

Please let me know when you’ve been approved and are ready to start writing. Keep a tally of how many cards you write please.

Facebook and Twitter have PTV accounts that are fun to follow. There is a whole community of writers across the country that share on social media. (I even get excited when followers like my postcard designs) #PostcardsToVoters

So…you will need postcards, postcard stamps and art supplies. As you will see on the website, it’s supposed to also be a fun activity. We can share our creative designs, sources for preprinted cards and fun new stickers or markers. I am fond of using colorful 81/2″ x 11″ card stock that is cut to 4 pieces. This is the cheaper way to go, but I also have a variety of printed cards. If you need ANYthing, please just ask me. The PTV website has great options for buying postcards, 100 for $15.

Due to the pandemic, most of the writing groups that formed across the country are not meeting in person. We would like to have a virtual writing party on June 25^th if everyone is approved and ready. We are flexible. Again let me know when you’re approved and we’ll plan from there.

One last note…a postcard writer from Colorado commented on a photo I recently posted on twitter of my completed cards. He commented that his goal is “to ensure that the cards he sends will be looked at.” Let’s get our cards on those refrigerators, my friends!!!!

If you go to the PTV website and click on the tab for “results” you will see the list of campaigns that PTV has been involved in. The action that we participated in was postcards to registered Democrats in specific Florida counties with information on how to enroll in vote-by-mail. Turns out, much to my surprise, that Florida has a wonderful vote-by-mail system that enables a voter to enroll and for two federal election cycles, they will automatically be sent a mail-in ballot for every election. I wish New York had that. Given the pandemic and the fear that people will not feel safe going to the polls for in-person voting or, like in several primaries around the country, many polling places were closed due to staff shortages, all of this confusion in November can be avoided if people have signed up for vote-by-mail. Our cards gave Democratic voters all the information they needed to enroll in this program and ended with the tag line, “When FL Dems vote-by-mail, Dems win!” And needless to say, few battleground states are as important as Florida.

We all ordered postcards and stamps, signed up on the PTV website, created our sample cards and got approved and started working on our address lists. Our virtual Zoom Postcard-Writing Party on Thursday, June 25^th would be a social gathering to schmooze together while we all worked on our cards. Some folks had already finished several lists and others were just starting. Some members preferred to finish and mail their postcards without joining the Zoom, which was fine, while others looked forward to the group interaction.

For those of us on the virtual party, the event was a lot of fun and it was wonderful to catch up and share the time together. It was also gratifying to have younger women with kids at home join us. It is one of the ironies of this pandemic that being forced to go virtual has opened up our meetings to more members, particularly younger members with children at home.

“The pandemic has actually affected my activism in mostly positive ways,” said leadership member Lisa Marrin. “Stay-At-Home orders have given me much more time for postcard writing, Zooming and learning more about the history of party politics in the nation. Since so many of my children’s activities were cancelled and I am working from home on my own schedule, I have been able to meet more often with the EEAN leadership committee and we have developed a great framework for our upcoming actions. I have committed to three different postcard projects and have just finished training on phone-banking. I am excited to engage in this way. The downside of political action during a pandemic is the lack of face-to-face contact with like-minded individuals and my reluctance to join in-person protests. As I try to put the health of myself and my family first, I just have not been able to bring myself to attend. Luckily, I can take satisfaction in my virtual activism and the fact that I am able to participate in those ways on a larger scale.”

Lisa’s friend, Stacie Coppola, is a new member who also has children at home and was able to join the postcard party Zoom. It was so uplifting to watch them participate and to hear how Stacie turned it into a teachable moment for her son and daughter, who are 12-year-old fraternal twins.

“I’m so grateful to have this opportunity to help out and to use it as a way to teach my children about the importance of participation,” said Stacie. “My children and I ended up having a really great discussion about the struggle that women and African Americans have had in getting the right to vote and how important it is not to squander that right. COVID-19 has really driven home the fear I have that my children will be facing a very different world than we all have. My husband usually expresses hesitancy about introducing them to the heaviness that comes with political topics but we both realize that this next generation will be facing challenges that will make it impossible for them not to be ‘political.’ Working on the postcards allowed them to see that participation, even on small levels, can be fun and comforting. The women at East End Action Network have a kindness of spirit that is very motivating and has encouraged me to take the edge off of my anger at where our country is and just get to work.”

At the end of the Zoom, everyone held up their cards so we could see all the amazing designs. I was blown away by the creativity of some of the designs and there was no doubt in my mind that Florida voters receiving these will take notice of them. Here are a few examples:

Postcards by Stacie Coppola and her children; Sharon Adams’ postcards; and Patricia Callan’s postcards.

It is our hope that members will continue on their own requesting lists and mailing more postcards to Florida voters since no group activity is necessary to get more address lists. Once approved, when you finish a list, all you have to do is text the word “hello” to the mobile number and another address list with instructions for what to write on the card is emailed to you. Even once we start writing postcards for our Democratic nominee in CD#1, we plan on continuing our work with PTV. (Due to the large number of absentee ballots that needed counting, we have only just gotten the results that Stony Brook University Chemistry Chair Nancy Goroff has won the primary and will be the Democratic candidate to take on GOP Trump-clone Congressman Lee Zeldin in the fall).

The PTV system is user-friendly, interactive and fun. I was so intrigued by PTV that I reached out to Mr. McMullin to learn more about him and about PTV. He was open and friendly, exactly what one would expect from someone called “Tony the Democrat.” My first question was about the vote-by-mail action to Florida. I had assumed it was because of COVID. Turns out it wasn’t. They started this action with Florida voters in 2018.

“I don’t remember how it came to my attention,” he said, “but in Florida, you can enroll in vote-by- mail simply by making a phone call, only one phone call needed, and you are locked into automatically receiving a ballot by mail for every election. This is a powerful incentive for a volunteer trying to figure out how to spend their time and postage, because with an enrollment process as easy as a phone call, the likelihood of a positive outcome is much higher than with a different state where you have to request a ballot application, fill it out and mail it back, then fill out the ballot and mail that. All those steps reduce the number of people who will complete that enrollment. When I pitch to volunteers that I need their help to do this action, I want to give them an action that has the biggest chance of success. I hear from people why don’t we do this in Michigan or Arizona and the answer comes down to the ease of enrollment and the length of the term which can’t be matched by any other state. I can’t in good conscience ask our volunteers to spend the same kind of postage when there is a much lower success rate of enrollment.”

Tony also explained that having worked on this initiative over several years, it helps the county supervisors process these vote-by-mail requests. “This way they are not inundated, not flooded with requests which would happen if we held onto the postcards and mailed them all at once, then they would get swamped with new enrollments and their office staff would be beleaguered. That also would not serve the voter as well. By our volunteers writing and mailing them along the way, we are good partners and give the county supervisors an easier time.”

It is serendipitous that Florida has an excellent vote-by-mail system that makes it worthwhile for the time and expense of his volunteers and at the same time is arguably the most important of the battleground states. “We have known for a long time,” said Tony, “that Florida can be the firewall because there is no path for reelection for Trump without Florida. If Florida turns blue, that is all we need to stop Trump.”

There is another added benefit of vote-by-mail that extends beyond the presidential race. “Once Democrats are enrolled, they then get ballots for every election. Every study proves that if you are mailed a ballot automatically rather than relying just on voting in person, that this increases turnout throughout the state at every level of government.”

This connects so nicely to what Dr. Lara Putnam, historian at the University of Pittsburgh, talks about in my book, which is the need to create an ongoing progressive ecosystem that begins at the local level. I mentioned Dr. Putnam’s analysis to Tony. “I have goose bumps listening to you describe focusing on local elections. This is what I tell our volunteers, that their efforts with the postcards will help change behavior and strengthen the voting habit. It is hard to make voting a habit, we are talking about people with two jobs, single parents, people burdened with elder care issues and so they could be forgiven for missing a special election for county commissioner. But now, if they can get the ballot in the mail, it is just inevitable that they will participate at a higher rate.”

As good as Florida’s vote-by-mail system is, Tony explained to me that it used to be even better. No surprise, the change came once Republicans took over the state legislature. “Florida has a lot of pride in their vote-by-mail program, which used to be permanent. You would always get a ballot as long as you lived at the same address. Then when the GOP took over, they modified it to make it expire after two federal election cycles, generally four years. But to show that they really have no fundamental problem with voting by mail, they really just want to make it harder for everyone to vote, they grandfathered in those already enrolled so that they would still be permanent. At that point, the GOP had an advantage in vote-by-mail enrollments. It was an insidious way to game the system.”

But thanks to all the efforts to enroll Democrats in vote-by-mail, that GOP advantage is gone. According to a recent article in Politico, entitled, “Florida Democrats Gain Vote By Mail Advantage,” Democrats now hold a significant lead in vote-by-mail enrollments. “Democrats have opened up a 302,000-voter advantage over Republicans in vote-by-mail enrollment, an edge that could pay big dividends in President Donald Trump’s newly adopted must-win state.”

Helping Florida turn blue is so crucial, that Tony told me PTV will continue to focus on vote-by-mail this summer. “We are going to continue for the next couple of months, hopefully with another 600,000 postcards,” he said. After that, they will point their army of volunteers towards helping candidate campaigns. Right now, he can’t say which campaigns they will be helping. “I can’t know in the beginning of July which campaigns we are going to be writing for. I have some guesses based on conversations with people leading multiple candidate efforts in different states, such as Ohio and Texas, but it is a fluid situation and different campaigns sign up every week.” There is a web form on the PTV site that campaigns can fill out. “But the more volunteers we have, the more campaigns we can help. People are signing up and writing over 15,000 postcards a day, which is terrific. We try to forecast our writing capacity and I have a spreadsheet of different campaigns. We have 76,000 volunteers; think what we could do if we could double that size by November. And we are ready for that. We have the technology and the infrastructure to do that. In 2018, we did 1.9 million postcards in September and October. I think we could do 4-5 million this year if we have enough people involved. Really, I have to thank our volunteer writers, they are the backbone of this work and they recruit their friends and family. We don’t have a marketing budget. When we grow, it is because the volunteers are happy.”

I asked if the Republicans had a similar operation. “I have seen a handful of specific GOP campaign postcard activities, but nothing close to our volunteer base or to broad campaigns, that is one of the things that we have an advantage,” he said. “Imagine what it would take for another group to start what we do and build that volunteer base. If another group is just starting up, they will have a long road to get to where we are.”

I thanked Tony for taking the time to speak with me and for all he is doing to reach voters. I only had one last question. I was curious to know if any of the sample postcards ever get turned down. “It doesn’t happen often,” he said. “When it does, it might be because the writer didn’t pay close enough attention to the rules and then we tell them what they need to do to fix it which most people are happy to do. Unfortunately, we do occasionally hear back from people that this is too picky for them and it’s not a volunteer activity that suits them. But that is pretty rare.”

PTV was an activity that ideally suited our group. Our virtual event was a success and our members had enjoyed participating. And we were especially pleased that members were continuing to ask for more lists on their own and continued to mail more postcards. We will be planning more PTV parties this summer, virtual and possibly in-person with social distancing. And just maybe PTV could help us in our fight to unseat Zeldin.

For Sharon, who started with PTV on her own in 2017, she said it has been gratifying watching PTV grow. She also said it has taken on an even more meaning for the volunteer writers after watching Trump double down on his divisive and racist messages.

“I’m very impressed by the incredible amount of volunteers, all across the country, who are so seriously invested in Postcards To Voters,” she said. “On this fourth of July weekend, one volunteer shared on social media that they’re using their postcard writing as ‘a distraction from the horrible speeches being made about America.’ Another writer felt ‘this is the most patriotic thing I could accomplish today.’ Volunteers stated they will save their celebrations for November. As the holiday weekend unwinds, I’ve just completed another ten postcards which are headed to Broward County to encourage vote-by-mail. I’m looking forward to our next virtual writing party or possibly an outdoor writing party with masks and social distancing guidelines a key factor. “

Go to the PTV website and give it a try. If you are part of a grassroots group or a book club, you can add a virtual event to your postcard-writing. But it is also an easy action you can do by yourself. I like writing and designing my cards at the end of the day while I sit and watch television, a good antidote to the news. You will find the time of the day that works best for you. And if you need a guidebook to show you how to integrate grassroots volunteerism into your daily life, read my book and meet the women who did exactly that. The book is available on Amazon.com and at Canio’s Books (631) 725-4926. A book talk hosted by Canio’s Books can be found on the following link: https://www.facebook.com/caniosbooks/videos/983767798721737/

Speaking of my book, I have set up a fundraiser with the book as a way to say thank you to Tony for all he is doing for voters. PTV stays afloat from donations and to help them in that effort, I will be sending a signed copy of the book, free of charge, to the first 20 people who donate to PTV in response to this blog post. To help PTV track those donations, please add $.46 (46 cents) – in honor of the 46^th President we are all working hard to elect – to whatever amount you would like to donate. Here is the link for the donate tab on the PTV website: https://postcardstovoters.org/donate/. Follow the instructions to donate either with Paypal or by mailing a check. And don’t forget to add the 46 cents so that I know to mail you a copy of the book. Let’s grow their army of volunteers and make 5 million postcards for November happen.

In my next blog post, I will focus on phone-banking. There are many opportunities to phone-bank. Every candidate and campaign has phone-banking for volunteers. You can go right now to the Biden campaign’s website at https://joebiden.com/take-action/ and become a volunteer. You can also go to the campaign of any candidate in your district. All campaigns will set you up to phone-bank.

But like PTV, there are also groups conducting phone-banking to battleground states for vote-by-mail. The Florida Democratic advantage in vote-by-mail enrollments is being created not just by the postcards but by phone-banking as well. There are some advantages and disadvantages of each. With postcards, you have the advantage of working on them at any time of the day that is convenient for you. Your whole family can get involved and designing and coloring the postcards is fun. By contrast, phone-banking is a solitary experience and setting it up is a little more complicated than mailing postcards. But phone-banking offers one big advantage, the ability to directly interact with the voter, enabling us to answer their questions and help them get enrolled in vote-by-mail. For this reason, at EEAN, we decided to do both.

To get us started, EEAN leadership member Alex Margolis who is a powerhouse when it comes to voter outreach, both with postcards and with phone-banking, offered to give us a presentation about the phone-banking she has been doing. She has been working with a Florida Democratic group, FL Dems, who have organized a phone-banking outreach to enroll registered Democratic voters in Palm Beach County (PBC) in vote-by-mail. The action is called PBC VBM. They have a Facebook group at https://www.facebook.com/groups/GrassrootsPalmBeach/

Alex, who is a corporate attorney, told us about PBC VBM on the postcard party Zoom, explaining how this initiative works.

“There’s really a unique opportunity in Palm Beach County, because the election supervisor though a Republican, seems to be pretty good and is working with the Democratic Party to facilitate enrolling voters in vote-by-mail. These calling list are all Democrats and it’s a very easy phone call. You’re not asking for money. You’re not asking for support for a candidate. You’re just asking if they’re enrolled in vote-by-mail and stating that we want to help them enroll if they are not signed up for it. If they say ‘yes’, you enter that and it is automatically communicated and the supervisor will follow up with this voter to get them enrolled in vote-by-mail. I’m doing postcards also but with the phone calls, you’re actually signing them up.”

We discussed that many of us are still a bit squeamish about talking to voters on the phone. But, as Rebecca pointed out, the nature of these calls should make it easier.

“What I find so alluring about this is that you’re not asking people for money. You’re not asking them to give you information that maybe they don’t want to talk to you about. You’re calling to provide a service for them, which in these times of everything being so confusing, I could see people really appreciating it,” said Rebecca on our Zoom call. “I also keep saying to myself, if I’m not going to do it now for this election, I’m never going to do it. This is the election to do it.”

We all agreed that if ever we were going to push ourselves out of our comfort zones and commit to phone-banking, this is the time to do it. And Alex said it is true that, in her experience, many voters she spoke with were appreciative. “This one guy, after I asked him if we can count on him to vote for Democrats this year, he said, ‘I’d vote for a tuna fish sandwich before I’d ever vote for Republican again.’ This other call was with a veteran and he was great. He said, ‘All women should be elected. Women should run the world. It would be so much better.’ Then on another call I spoke with some younger voters who really want to volunteer to help out. Some of these conversations have been really uplifting.”

Many of us signed up with PBC VBM as well as a training session with Alex who will take us through the process step-by-step. In my next blog post, I will be able to bring you this hands-on information about how it works. Hopefully that will help you get past your own reservations about phone-banking. Then, for the last blog post on voter outreach methods, I will focus on text-banking. In the meantime, sign up with PTV and get started on your postcards!

To read this blog post on theresistanceandme.com click here.

Fair Elections for New York

David Posnett — Tue, 18 Dec 2018 14:39:49 +0000

New Yorkers deserve a responsive, accountable government. Voter turnout in New York is among the lowest in the nation, due in part to antiquated procedures for registration and voting that discourage participation. And our campaign finance system favors the wealthy over everyday, working New Yorkers. To tackle the crises we face in housing, living wage jobs, criminal justice, affordable health care, transportation, climate, fair taxes, and more, we must transform a campaign finance system that advantages the interests of the few over those of the many.

The shift in power in the New York State Senate—and a Governor and an Assembly prioritizing democratic reforms—presents an unprecedented opportunity to unrig the rules, strengthen our democracy, and incentivize elected officials to represent the values of the people of the state. A broad coalition of individuals and groups across New York is coming together to ensure that an overhaul of New York’s voting and campaign finance systems is the first order of business in the 2019 New York Legislature. This Fair Elections reform package would:

Increase the power of small donations. It is critical we implement a small donor matching system for state elections, including District Attorneys, like the successful programs in New York City and Connecticut. This gives everyday people the means to run for office and represent their communities relying on small donations instead of large checks. After the Supreme Court allowed unlimited, secret money to flow into our elections, small donor matching funds remains the most powerful way to combat the influence of big money. By matching small dollar donations 6-to-1, we can amplify the voices of women; of people of color; of the working and middle classes; and of any and all under-represented New Yorkers in the political process. Adequate enforcement as well as robust candidate support services would ensure the matching funds program runs smoothly.
Limit the influence of big money. The very wealthy and corporations shouldn’t be allowed to buy elections. We can put a check on their outsize influence by closing the “LLC loophole,” which allows mega donors to funnel limitless amounts to candidates, and by reducing New York’s unusually high contribution limits, among other improvements.
Make it easier, not harder, to vote. Including but not limited to automatic voter registration, early voting, same day registration, online voter registration, no excuse absentee voting, new party enrollment deadlines, pre-registration for 16- and 17-year-olds, full voting access for people with disabilities, and codify into law New York’s new policy to extend voting rights to all New Yorkers with past convictions.

Fair Elections Supporters

32BJ SEIU
50 West 93 Street Tenant Association
ACT18 Indivisible
Action Potluck
Advocates for Justice Chartered Attorneys
ALIGN
Alliance for Quality Education
American Pakistani Public Affairs Committee
The Arena
Association of Tenants of Lincoln Towers
Bend the Arc
The Black Institute
Brennan Center for Justice
Briarcliff – Ossining Indivisible
Bronx Progressives
Buffalo Democratic Socialists of America
Campaign for New York Health
Campaign Legal Center
Capital District Democratic Socialists of America
CCoHOPE Indivisible
Central Park Gardens Tenants Association
Chinese American Planning Council
Churches United For Fair Housing
Citizen Action New York
The Civics Center
Color of Change
Common Cause New York
Communities United for Police Reform Action Fund
Community Voices Heard
Concerned Citizens For Change
Cooper Square Committee
The Creative Resistance
Crown Heights Tenants Union
CWA District 1
Democracy Initiative
Democracy Matters
Demos
Downtown Women for Change
Dutchess County Progressive Action Alliance
Empire State Indivisible
Empire State Progressives
End Citizens United
Equal Citizens
Ethical Humanist Society of Long Island
Every Voice
Four Freedoms Democratic Club
The Gathering for Justice
Generation Citizen NY
Grassroots Action NY
Greater NYC for Change
Housing Works, Inc.
Human Services Council
Humanists of Long Island
Indivisible Beekman
Indivisible CD19 NY
Indivisible Harlem
Indivisible Nation BK
Indivisible Scarsdale
Indivisible the Fight Is On
Indivisible We Stand Upper West Side
Indivisible Westchester
Jews for Racial & Economic Justice
Labor-Religion Coalition of NYS
Long Island Activists
Long Island Civic Engagement Table
Long Island Jobs with Justice
Long Island Network for Change
Long Island Progressive Coalition
Long Island Together
Lower Hudson Valley Progressive Action Network
Make the Road New York
MAYDAY America
Metropolitan Council on Housing
Metro New York Health Care for All
Mid Suffolk Chapter of the National Organization for Women
Move Forward Staten Island
MoveOn.org
MPower Change
Muslims For Progress
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
New York City Loft Tenants
New York Civic Engagement Table
New York Communities for Change
New York Immigration Coalition
New York Lawyers for the Public Interest
New York Progressive Action Network
New York State Council of Churches
New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG)
Nobody Leaves Mid-Hudson
No IDC NY
North American Climate, Conservation and Environment (NACCE)
Northeast NY Coalition for Occupational Safety & Health
Northwest Bronx Indivisible
NY19Votes
NYCAIC’s #HALTsolitary campaign
NYCD16 Indivisible
NYC Democratic Socialists of America
NYS NAACP Conference of Branches
NYS Nurses Association (NYSNA)
Our Revolution
Partnership for the Public Good
People For the American Way
The People’s Empowerment Project/Democracy Coffee
People Power Patchogue
Persist81
Progressive Action of Lower Manhattan
Progressive East End Reformers (PEER)
Progressive Power Inwood Heights
Progressive Schenectady
Progressive Turnout Project
Public Citizen
Putnam Progressives
Rally+Rise
Reinvent Albany
RepresentUs
Resist and Replace, Suffolk County
Riverside Edgecombe Neighborhood Association
Rockland United
RWDSU
Sierra Club Atlantic Chapter
Small Planet Institute
Solidarity Committee/Capital District
Stand Up America
St Nicks Alliance
Strong Economy For All Coalition
Suffolk Progressives
Sunrise NYC
Tenants and Neighbors
Tenants Political Action Committee
True Blue New York
Ulster People for Justice & Democracy
Union Vale Indivisible
Up2Us
Uptown Progressive Action
Washington County Progressives
We of Action New York
Westchester Citizen Therapists
Westchester for Change
Working Families Party

New Registrations Favor Dems in CD-1

David Posnett — Thu, 08 Feb 2018 20:47:11 +0000

Released by the Suffolk County Board of Elections: new registrants for the last month by party and by political subdivision. This is a measure of how well we are doing with efforts to register voters. (Table I)

	Total	Dem (%)	Rep (%)	Blank (%)	other (%)	diff D/R (%)
Babylon	320	39.7	15.9	35.6	8.8	23.8
Brookhaven	537	38.5	18.1	36.5	6.9	20.5
East Hampton	41	51.2	9.8	34.1	4.9	41.5
Huntington	321	34.6	23.4	33.6	8.4	11.2
Islip	338	38.2	17.8	37.6	6.5	20.4
Riverhead	32	31.3	25.0	40.6	3.1	6.3
Shelter Island	9	66.7	0.0	22.2	11.1	66.7
Smithtown	163	27.6	31.3	31.9	9.2	-3.7
Southampton	100	50.0	16.0	30.0	4.0	34.0
Southold	23	30.4	34.8	30.4	4.3	-4.3
Total	1884	37.8	19.6	35.2	7.3	18.2
CD-1	866	38.7	19.3	35.5	6.6	19.4
CD-2	640	39.1	16.9	36.3	7.8	22.2
CD-3	378	33.9	25.1	32.8	8.2	8.7

Ofcourse new registrations over the last month are a drop in the bucket, but it seems these drops are of different sizes. The percentage of new registrations/total numbers of registered voters is captured here. Note that Shelter Island, Southampton, Babylon and East Hampton, did best in terms of adding new voters (Table II)

	total new	total	% new
	registrations	registrations	registrations
Babylon	320	129889	0.25
Brookhaven	537	308719	0.17
East Hampton	41	16956	0.24
Huntington	321	141901	0.23
Islip	338	199128	0.17
Riverhead	32	21884	0.15
Shelter Island	9	2391	0.38
Smithtown	163	84877	0.19
Southampton	100	38998	0.26
Southold	23	16666	0.14
Total	1884	961409	0.20
CD-1	866	472989	0.18
CD-2	640	320104	0.20
CD-3	378	168316	0.22

Original data from the Suffolk County Board of Elections:

New Registrations favor Dems in CD-1

David Posnett — Thu, 08 Feb 2018 20:08:00 +0000

	Total	Dem (%)	Rep (%)	Blank (%)	other (%)	Total (%)	diff D%-R%
Babylon	320	39.7	15.9	35.6	8.8	100	23.8
Brookhaven	537	38.5	18.1	36.5	6.9	100	20.5
East Hampton	41	51.2	9.8	34.1	4.9	100	41.5
Huntington	321	34.6	23.4	33.6	8.4	100	11.2
Islip	338	38.2	17.8	37.6	6.5	100	20.4
Riverhead	32	31.3	25.0	40.6	3.1	100	6.3
Shelter Island	9	66.7	0.0	22.2	11.1	100	66.7
Smithtown	163	27.6	31.3	31.9	9.2	100	-3.7
Southampton	100	50.0	16.0	30.0	4.0	100	34.0
Southold	23	30.4	34.8	30.4	4.3	100	-4.3
Total	1884	37.8	19.6	35.2	7.3	100	18.2
CD-1	866	38.7	19.3	35.5	6.6	100	19.4
CD-2	640	39.1	16.9	36.3	7.8	100	22.2
CD-3	378	33.9	25.1	32.8	8.2	100	8.7

Other than in Smithtown and Southold, new registrants most frequently chose the Dem. Party. For the 866 new voters in CD-1, 38.7% chose the Dem party, 19.3% chose the Rep. party and 35.5% chose no party.

	*total new*	*total*	% new/total
	*registrations*	*registrations*	registrations
Babylon	320	129889	0.25
Brookhaven	537	308719	0.17
East Hampton	41	16956	0.24
Huntington	321	141901	0.23
Islip	338	199128	0.17
Riverhead	32	21884	0.15
Shelter Island	9	2391	0.38
Smithtown	163	84877	0.19
Southampton	100	38998	0.26
Southold	23	16666	0.14
Total	*1884*	961409	*0.20*
CD-1	866	472989	0.18
CD-2	640	320104	0.20
CD-3	378	168316	0.22

New York Agrees To Give Voter Info To Trump

David Posnett — Thu, 03 Aug 2017 09:55:46 +0000

BREAKING: The NY Board of Elections will comply with the feds and hand over the state’s voter database. Here’s what that means for you.

By Simone Wilson (Patch Staff) – Updated August 2, 2017 6:32 pm ET

ALBANY, NY — Personal information about all New York voters will be released to President Donald Trump’s controversial “election integrity” commission, the state Board of Elections announced Wednesday, despite promises from New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo that the state would withhold its voter database from the feds.

“We will comply,” a spokesman for the Board of Elections told Patch. “The data will be sent out this afternoon.”

Want more local news from your NYC neighborhood? Sign up here to receive free newsletters and breaking alerts from Patch.

Back in late June, after Trump’s commission requested voter info from all 50 states, Gov. Cuomo said: “New York refuses to perpetuate the myth voter fraud played a role in our election. We will not be complying with this request, and I encourage the Election Commission to work on issues of vital importance to voters, including ballot access, rather than focus on debunked theories of voter fraud.”

However, each state’s decision on whether to share its voter info with the feds — or with anyone else — is ultimately not up to the governor’s office. It’s up to the board of elections. And Wednesday, New York’s board made the choice to comply.

Gov. Cuomo’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

UPDATE: In a statement sent out Wednesday evening, Cuomo clarified that when he said New York wouldn’t hand over its voter rolls back in June, he was responding to the Trump commission’s original request, which demanded “sensitive personal data” like criminal histories and Social Security numbers. Since then, Cuomo said, the federal request has been revised to demand only “publicly available information” about voters — including their names, ages, addresses, political affiliations and voting histories. (Scroll down for more details.) “Our position remains unchanged,” Cuomo said Wednesday, “and we will continue to deny requests for sensitive personal data about New York residents, which is protected under the law. We will never provide private voter information to anyone, especially a politically-motivated organization seeking to perpetuate the myth of voter fraud.”

What The Data Dump Means For You

Social security numbers and driver’s license numbers will not be included in the dump, according to John Conklin, spokesman for the New York State Board of Elections. But voters’ names, ages, addresses, political parties, voting histories and various other details will still be in there.

Here’s a sample layout of the files New York will be handing over.

In short: As of this afternoon, personal details about you and your political views — along with those of nearly 13 million other New York voters — will be sitting on a computer in the White House, waiting to be tapped into at the U.S. government’s discretion.

“It is public information,” Board of Elections spokesman Conklin explained in an email Wednesday, “and the Commission made the specific attestation required under NY Election Law that the information would be used for an elections purpose. We had no lawful reason to deny it under NY Election Law and NY FOIL statute.”

Trump’s 12-member election commission, named the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity and led by Vice President Mike Pence, was formed in May to investigate possible flaws and/or fraud in America’s voting system. (After the president claimed the November 2016 election had been plagued by “serious voter fraud,” and that millions of illegal immigrants had cast ballots, possibly costing him the popular vote.)

To do this effectively, commissioners said, they would need info on each voter in the country.

In response to this unprecedented demand from DC, elections officials in dozens of states announced they either would not comply at all or would only hand over some of the details requested.

Various watchdog groups have also tried to block the data flow in court — so far, to no avail.

It is not entirely uncommon for the New York State Board of Elections, as well as boards in other states, to release voter rolls upon request. Politico has a good explainer up on what is considered a legitimate request and why.

But in this case, privacy advocates are worried about the implications of the White House having easy access to a database of every voter in America.

“A centralized national database of state voter records is contrary to principles of federalism and local control,” NYU law professor Erin Murphy said in a statement released by the Electronic Privacy Information Center. “Moreover, the collection of personal data is unreasonable and therefore implicates sacred constitutional rights.” (For more, see the center’s list of “51 reasons to end the collection of state voter records by the presidential election commission.”)

Common Cause, a self-described “nonpartisan good government watchdog group,” has also been on the front lines of the resistance.

In a lawsuit filed against Trump’s commission, Common Cause argued that a nationwide roundup of voter data violates the Privacy Act, passed in the wake of Watergate to protect Americans from government surveillance.

“For voters and prospective voters facing political polarization,” the lawsuit says, “the threat that the federal government will monitor their electoral participation and even their party affiliations is deeply troubling and has deterred and will continue to deter the exercise of their First Amendment-protected rights to express their views through the ballot box.”

This story has been updated. Photo by Tara Conry/Patch

Trump’s Support on Long Island

David Posnett — Thu, 18 May 2017 14:13:20 +0000

Carol Polsky published a nice report of interviews with 6 Long Islanders in Newsday. These are people that voted for Trump but maybe having second thoughts at least on some issues. We posted a similar analysis of working class voters in Ohio. What you can see by reading these reports carefully, is some erosion in voter’s confidence that Trump will live up to his campaign promises, i.e. will he lead us into war in the near east? Will health care insurance costs actually decrease as promised? Will he save healthcare for those with pre-existing conditions? Will L.I. construction businesses suffer if Latinos are all sent home, etc.

We must listen carefully to these people. Just as an example, I have reprinted one of the 6 case histories:

Bitakos, 52, has driven a taxi on Long Island for 15 years. He is an independent who “goes with the flow” and has become almost a one-man predictor of success in the past seven presidential elections. He voted for Democrat Bill Clinton, Republican George W. Bush, Democrat Barack Obama, and most recently, Republican Donald Trump.

Bitakos said he was drawn to some of Trump’s stances, even though he’d initially liked Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who lost the Democratic primary race to Clinton.

Not long after the collapse of the first legislative effort in late March to repeal and replace Obama’s signature health care achievement, the Affordable Care Act, Bitakos gave his verdict: “He failed. They don’t have anything to replace it with so what are they going to do?”

Bitakos gets his health insurance through the expanded Medicaid program put in place under the ACA. “I need it . . . I’m diabetic, I get my blood pressure pills. If he throws everybody off and starts doing his own thing, we’re dead.”

For now, Bitakos is sorry he went with Trump. “I should never have voted for him,” he said. “I regret voting for him, honest to God.”

Trump had promised jobs and a stronger military and, “I like respect for the military and law enforcement,” said Bitakos, who hangs an American flag outside his home. “There were a lot of things I liked about him: I liked the patriotism about him, I liked the America thing, the America first.”

But he has quickly become anxious and frustrated. His complaints range from Trump’s frequent trips to his Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago, to his possible connections with Russia.

“I don’t see anything happening with anything he’s doing,” Bitakos said of Trump.

“I just hope he doesn’t cause any serious problems with the Middle East,” Bitakos said. “I hope he doesn’t open up a big war because guys are going to get killed. And who knows what is going on with him and Russia. That’s the big question. But it’s too soon yet.”

It is not obvious how will translate into lack of support for downstream candidates (Zeldin for example, or local candidates). But as voters become increasingly frustrated, I assume they will want “the other party” in Nov 2017 and Nov 2018.