Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Reproductive Justice and Gender

Millions of Women Voters Disenfranchised

By Brittany Stalsburg and Scott Novakowski, The Wip. Posted September 13, 2008.


Unregistered voters create an unrepresentative electorate -- one of the greatest threats to a fair, democratic system.
Advertisement

All over America, there were plenty of reasons to celebrate women last month: August marked the 88th anniversary of the 19th Amendment's ratification, which gave women the right to vote. Women's Equality Day, which was on August 26, commemorated that victory. There are now more women in the U.S. Congress than ever (88) and 2008 was a year when a woman came within a hair's breadth of becoming a major ticket presidential nominee.

But this year, there's also a real threat to the voting rights of millions of low-income women, and it is in direct violation of Federal law.

Take, for instance, the story of Dionne O'Neal. Ms. O'Neal is a resident of St. Louis, Missouri, where she works part-time while pursuing her GED. Like millions of Americans, Ms. O'Neal receives Food Stamps and government health care benefits to help meet her basic needs. If anybody has a deep concern about the future of economic policy, she does. But her right to have a say in government and what it does is being thwarted because Missouri, like many other states, has long ignored federal voter registration requirements designed to reach low-income voters.

The most disadvantaged women in our society are the least likely to express their voice in the political process. Ms. O'Neal is just one of the 32.5 million women -- 31 percent of all eligible women -- who were not registered to vote at their current address in 2006. Low-income women like Ms. O'Neal are disproportionately represented in that number. In 2006, only 63 percent of women in households making $25,000 or less were registered to vote compared to 81 percent of women in households making $75,000 or more.

There is, though, a federal law on the books to help reverse this trend.

Congress passed the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) in 1993 to increase the number of eligible citizens registering to vote in federal elections. Recognizing that an unrepresentative electorate is one of the greatest threats to a fair democratic system, the NVRA was drafted specifically to ensure equal access to voter registration. One of the law's provisions, Section 7, requires public assistance agencies to offer voter registration services to clients.

But many people eligible to register under Section 7 don't know it, because too many states aren't properly implementing the law.

While over 2.6 million voters registered at public assistance agencies in the first few years of the law's implementation, agency-based registration has declined significantly over the past 10 years even though more and more people are receiving public benefits such as Food Stamps. Field investigations conducted by Demos and our partners have revealed violations of the law in states across the country.

Women comprise the vast majority of public assistance recipients and thus are the primary beneficiaries of Section 7. A staggering 90 percent of adult recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) are women. Nearly 8.8 million Food Stamp recipients are women. Sixty-nine percent of those receiving Medicaid are women.

And women are likely to be the primary caregivers for children and receive benefits on behalf of their dependents. Not surprisingly, according to the US Census, over three quarters of those who manage to register to vote at public assistance agencies are female.

Now more than ever, implementation and compliance with the too-long ignored National Voter Registration Act is a women's issue. The most disadvantaged members of society are least likely to participate in politics but arguably have the most to gain-low-income women lag behind in education, have less access to healthcare and affordable housing, have fewer assets, and experience more job insecurity.

The current economic downturn only makes matters worse for low income women, as single mothers have the highest unemployment rate among all men and women. Various policies, including enhanced educational opportunities and increased paid family leave, have been proposed to improve the lives of low-income women and their families. Unfortunately, politicians will not respond properly to the needs of these women if they do not exercise their political power.

There are increasing signs that states will no longer be able to ignore their responsibilities under the law. In a lawsuit brought by Ms. O'Neal, a federal judge in Missouri recently ruled that the state's Department of Social Services is in violation of the NVRA and ordered the state to comply.

Ensuring that voter registration is offered to the millions of women who participate in public assistance programs is an effective and efficient way to draw low-income women into the political process in unprecedented numbers, providing them with the voice they desperately need.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: election08, women voters, voter disenfranchisement

Brittany Stalsburg is a political science Phd student concentrating on women in politics at Rutgers University. She and Senior Policy Analyst Scott Novakowski work on the NVRA implementation project in the Democracy Program at Demos, a national public policy center.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Reproductive Justice and Gender! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Even if
Posted by: JSquercia on Sep 13, 2008 11:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even if the states really do OBEY the LAW the Republicans have many other tricks to keep the poor disenfranchied . Florida is demanding a mtach to a state database in spite the fact that when the Social security Adminsiration attempted a match (last 4 of Social Security Number ) it found a 48% Error rate . The whole BS of Voter ID is being used NOT to prevent Fraud But to deprive citizens of their right to vote . Who can forget the Nuns denied their right to vote for lack of a valid ID . Many had been voting for years but that apparently means NOTHING . The Republicans
claim that these moves impose nothing like a poll tax because in some instances the required Document is free .However the required Proof of age or birthplace are often NOT FREE and hard to obtain . Michigan Republicans intend to challenge voters attempting to vote from addresses of Forecloed homes . Virginia is attempting to suppress Students from voting from their Campus Address

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

wow, what a load of lies
Posted by: rickiey on Sep 13, 2008 1:24 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No one is "being disenfranchised".

There is a HUGE difference between "being prevented from voting" (disenfranchisement) and "not being actively sought out and convinced to vote, which is what you are touting as disenfranchisement.

Just to clarify things, disenfranchisement is when you attempt to vote, and are prevented from doing so.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: wow, what a load of lies Posted by: seilnotnilc
» RE: wow, what a load of lies Posted by: cwilsondrum
» RE: wow, what a load of lies Posted by: Axiom69
Not really
Posted by: BeckyD on Sep 15, 2008 6:05 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Disenfranchised means someone is stopping you from voting - as, for instance, Jim Crow laws or the inappropriate and illegal voter purges in Florida and other states during the 2000 and 2004 elections.

If someone can't be bothered to register to vote, they've disenfranchised themselves, and frankly, I'm glad. If you don't care enough to get to a DMV or library or any of the other places you can register these days, how will you manage to get yourself educated about the issues and candidates so that you can make an informed choice? Yes, the social service agency should be complying with the law, but I'm assuming these women got through an 8th grade civics class and/or have access to television. Voting and voter registration isn't exactly kept secret - if they really wanted to register, some TANF worker not offering them the form wouldn't stop them - they'd find another way. To call their lack of compliance 'disenfranchisement' is an insult to people whose votes have truly been taken away.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You have to want to vote.
Posted by: rajuncajun1960 on Sep 16, 2008 2:39 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The vast majority of our population knows that you have to register to vote. As I see it, if someone can't figure out how to vote, then maybe they have no business voting.

On a personal note, and I know it can't work this way, I have trouble with someone voting who's living on nothing but subsidies. Who will they vote for? Whoever promises to keep their subsidy coming. If you are dependent on the government to eat, you will continue to vote to keep that going.

Again, if you have to be coddled, coherced, or bribed into voting, you probably shouldn't be able to.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The bigot contingent speaks again
Posted by: Kym525 on Sep 16, 2008 4:33 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There's a rather nasty virus going around on Alternet whenever issues/articles that pertain to people of color are posted.

That virus is called RACISM, and it isn't just the republicans who are guilty of it.

Alternet readers are supposed to be far more tolerant in their attitudes, especially when it comes to race, but from the posts I've read, the opposite tends to be true. Between splitting hairs as to what "disenfranchisement" means, to assuming that mothers on government assistance "don't care" or will vote for someone who will keep them dependent on welfare, these ignorant fools continue to perpetuate the worst stereotypes about the poor and those of color.

Call it what you will, in failing to notify and register these people, this country is violating constitutional law and they know it. Imagine the turn of the tide if the women mentioned in the article were registered and VOTED come November 4th. Scary thought, huh?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The key... Part I.
Posted by: bobtr900 on Sep 16, 2008 6:36 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...to understanding this article is the seventh paragraph which refers to the states that are not following the letter or the spirit of the law. And apparently they are not, as a judge ordered them to do so.

My guess is that many, if not most, of these states are likely Repub 'red states', and it is to their political advantage to do all that they can, including the commission or omission of the law to prevent as many poor people as possible from voting. The Rethugs know that poor people usually vote Democratic, and the Repub party is hell bent on many things, especially the intentional disobedience of the law to further their own political interests.

Breaking the law or some form of legal or quasi-legal disobedience of same is what the Repub party is all about, just as long as it furthers their own politics. They call that being a conservative, but it is nothing less than criminally and morally corrupt.

Aren't they the party of the 'Moral Majority'. And aren't they the party of God, despite the fact that Jesus spoke of peace, love and tolerance, and they endorse none of those concepts. In reality the Repub party is only about Big Fascist Business and Big Religion, both of which are committed to 'Moral Relativism'.

Apropos of running afoul of the law: Scalia, of the SCOTUS, gave a speech(May, 2000) in which he called for the END of the rule of law AND the END of democracy in the USA. He is a staunch member of my religion, the Catholic Church and an equally staunch conservative, a Republican. The Pope, himself, and his immediate predecessor are/were Republicans, having endorsed them since before St. Reagan became president. Which is how St. Reagan, the sleeping-Alzheimers-rascist-criminal, became president in the first place.

These people would choke the life out of a living child, and at the same time will kill any one who doesn't totally protect the fetus, AND at the same time allowing the mother that is carrying that fetus to die, thus killing the fetus. If that isn't ass backward I do not know what is, and it is as criminally stupid. Somehow to them the fetus is all important while the living are of no importance. Hence, the death of some 4150 members of our military and the death of some 1.22 million Iraqis and who knows how many Afghanis; which is more of their killing of the living, and all for oil profits. So that is how much the religious right is really religious, NOT. So, the Pope goes his way, and I goes mine.

And lest we forget St. Reagan and Daddy Bush, head of the criminal Bush family, were the ones who perpetrated the Iran-Contra Affair. They also perpetrated the torture, rape and near murder of Sr. Dianna Ortiz. She now has the scars of 100 cigarette burns and cannot get through an interview or speech without lapsing into tears. It's happened during the three times I saw her speak.

And lest we forget, the Republican party tried to disenfranchise some (eight, I think) nuns who were trying to vote. I guess the current blocking of peoples voting rights via caging is just okay and hunky dory as long as these tactics serve the corrupt Republican party.

Their tactics include the caging of black vets who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. It also includes the caging of people who had to leave their homes due to Katrina and the failed levies that Lil' Georgie Bush caused to fail due to his withdrawal of funds from the Army Corps of Engineers and the resultant non-compliance of their plan for reinforcing the levies. And how many people died from that disaster, but then that's alright because they were not fetuses, maybe. And how many people died in those mine disasters, also orchestrated by Georgie Bush, the Pro-Life and Family Values president. What a crock.

And how many people... See part II, below.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» St. Reagan -love it! Posted by: Cathyblj
The Key. Part II.
Posted by: bobtr900 on Sep 16, 2008 6:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cont'd from above.

And how many people are being disenfranchised at this very moment due to hurricane Ike, and the result of being outside of their homes when the caging letter arrives at their home addresses.

Here in Ohio some 600,000 people have been stripped of their right to vote. Nationwide those numbers must be on the order of many millions of people. It's almost hard to imagine that European countries just give their natural born citizens the lifetime right to vote. Imagine that. But not here in the USA, where Scalia, Bush, Cheney and the Republican party rules everyone, and supported by Big Religion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]