“The struggle to gain equal voting rights for women was not easy. As they worked to open the voting booth to women, suffragists were verbally abused, arrested, and beaten. They faced stiff odds not only against the approval by Congress of an Amendment guaranteeing women’s suffrage, but also against the ratification of such an Amendment by the states. But they succeeded against those odds. And ninety years ago today, a Tennessee legislator acting on the advice of his suffragist mother cast the decisive vote in favor of ratification – tipping the balance in the Tennessee legislature and giving suffragists the final state needed to certify the 19th Amendment.

“In the nine decades since, women have made incredible strides toward equality. Today, women play leading roles in the American government and they are a fixture of the American workforce, but unfortunately, inequality among the genders persists. That is why it is more important today than ever that women – and all Americans – exercise their hard-won right to vote.

“President Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress have fought to level the playing field for women by enacting new laws upholding the principle of equal pay for equal work, by fighting for policies that make it easier for parents to balance work and family, by combating gender-based inequalities in our health system, and by making government more responsive to women’s concerns. But Republicans have opposed the progress enacted by Democrats, and they have pledged to defeat Democratic Congressional leaders who have been advocates for women’s equality in this fall’s elections. We cannot allow that to happen.

“On this 90th anniversary of the 19th Amendment, I urge women – and all Americans –not only to celebrate the history of women’s suffrage and the progress our country has made since its founding in extending civil and voting rights to all eligible Americans without regard for race or gender, but also to get out there and make use of their vote to ensure that women’s progress continues unabated.”

DNC Women’s Caucus Chair Mame Reiley also issued a statement in honor of the occasion:

“The 19th Amendment was born out of a near century-long struggle by American women to earn the right to make their voices heard alongside those of their fathers, sons, and husbands in the democratic process. Few of the courageous women who began the fight to earn the right to vote lived to cast a ballot, but their daughters and granddaughters – and millions of women across the country today – benefitted from their steadfast dedication to the cause of suffrage.

“Today, women not only have equal voting rights, they are a critical force in the democratic and electoral process. But despite women’s equality in the voting booth, they have not yet achieved full equality outside of it. So, President Obama has made it a priority to pursue greater equality for American women. To that end, he signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act into law, giving women in factories and office buildings across the country new tools to fight against unequal pay for equal work. He established the White House Council on Women and Girls, creating a new body tasked with helping American women to overcome challenges to equality of all kinds. And he has focused the resources of this White House to ensure that every piece of legislation he has enacted has opened doors of opportunity for women as well as men – through Recovery Act funding for quality child care and Affordable Care Act provisions prohibiting discrimination on the basis of gender, among other things.

“On this 90th anniversary of the 19th Amendment, I join Democrats across the country in celebrating the tremendous strides made by women since our country’s founding, and we pledge to support the President as he continues to do the hard work necessary to ensure equality and opportunity for women and for all Americans.”

“And so, on Aug. 18, 1920 — 90 years ago today — women won the right to vote and make our voices heard in government. In the nine decades since, women have made great strides in America. A higher percentage of us vote than men and a majority of us vote Democratic. Approximately three-fourths of the women in the U.S. Senate, House, and state legislatures are Democrats, as well. And, as we all know, the speaker of the House, third in line to the presidency, is Nancy Pelosi. Our college attendance is equal to men and we are now presidents of great universities, we have joined the work force in record numbers, and we work as doctors, soldiers, and plumbers as well as teachers, nurses and owners of our own small businesses — and so do our husbands and brothers. We have closed many of the gaps between women and men.”

“Although women continue to earn less than men — just 78 cents on the dollar, on average — President Barack Obama took immediate action to close that gap. The very first bill the president signed after taking office was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which protects women against pay discrimination and helps to ensure women receive equal pay for equal work. In addition, President Obama has championed flexible work policies like paid sick leave, because he believes women should not have to choose between keeping their jobs and caring for loved ones…. At the same time, the president and his Democratic partners in the Congress have enacted broad-based legislation that is not only helping America overall, but is also giving particular benefits to women. The Recovery Act, which has saved or created more than 2.5 million jobs across America, also contains provisions that are specifically targeted to help working women and families. For example, the act authorizes billions of dollars in new funding for Head Start and other child care programs and calls for unemployment insurance reforms that encourage states to cover part-time workers and individuals who have recently reentered the work force, categories which include millions of women. Similarly, the Affordable Care Act is an historic leap forward — for every American, but particularly for women. Under the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies will be prevented from imposing lifetime limits on coverage for women. They will no longer be able to drop coverage for women when they get sick, or pregnant. They will no longer be able to charge women exorbitant out-of-pocket deductibles or co-payments. And they will no longer be able to charge women more simply because of their gender.”

“On this 90th Anniversary of the ratification of the 19th Amendment, it is important to give thanks for how far we have come, and to continue to move forward together. So I hope you’ll join me in offering your support for the president and Democrats in Congress as they to work to open new doors of opportunity for women and men alike. And, I hope you will open your hearts to the plight of so many of our sisters around the world who do not share the freedoms we enjoy because of the hard work of our foremothers, those heroic suffragists, almost a century ago.”

For the first 144 years of this country's existence, women were not guaranteed the right to vote -- and winning that right did not come easily.

Women's suffrage took a movement. It took organizers who worked tirelessly and allies who fought for the cause in the halls of power. On August 18th, 1920, when the legislature of the state of Tennessee voted to ratify the 19th Amendment and affirm its place in the Constitution, it passed by a single vote.

Because of the work of those who came before me, my right to cast a ballot was never in question. From the first time that I stepped into a voting booth to the day when I became the executive director of the Democratic Party, I've been deeply mindful of that fact.

Last week, President Obama asked us all to make a commitment to vote this fall. To me, that promise isn't just about choosing the direction I hope to see this country take -- it's an opportunity to honor those who didn't have the right to vote but fought so that their daughters and granddaughters would not be denied the full measure of citizenship.

Will you join me and commit to vote in this year's election?

The movement for suffrage began before the Civil War. Women faced prison sentences -- even beatings -- to cast ballots as a gesture of protest. Even before the right to vote was won, women like Victoria Woodhull and Belva Lockwood ran for office. States across the country began to grant suffrage, and on the eve of the First World War, Woodrow Wilson -- a Democrat -- became the first president to take up the call.

Susan B. Anthony devoted her life to the cause of equality, and in 1897, decades before her fight was won, she wrote "Suffrage is the pivotal right." In the 90 years since the 19th Amendment became law, that statement has borne out.

Today, in the United States, there are more women registered to vote than men, and the gap stands at nearly 10 million. From House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Governor Jennifer Granholm of Michigan, women hold office at every level of government.

But the fight for full equality is not finished. In 2008, a woman in the United States earned only 77 cents for every dollar earned by a man. For women of color, the disparity is even greater.

We have a choice with this election about whether we want to continue the fight to bring down barriers -- whether we want to move forward or backward. We'll decide whether we want to honor the legacy of those who couldn't vote but reached for that right. But all those decisions begin with the promise that you will participate in the fall elections.

Commit to vote:

http://my.democrats.org/Suffrage

Thanks,

Jen

Jen O'Malley Dillon
Executive Director
Democratic National Committee

Learn more about the history of the Voting Rights Act.

More on the Voting Rights Act:

• The History of the Voting Rights Act
• Donna Brazile: Stay Vigilant to Protect Voting Rights
• Jeremy Bird: Celebrating the Voting Rights Act
• Alabama Commemorates the Voting Rights Act

In recognition of the historic achievement 45 years ago, DNC Chairman Tim Kaine issued the following statement:

“When President Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act, he called it a ‘triumph of freedom.’ Although the necessity of this law was born out of the dark legacy of slavery and Jim Crow laws, the Act opened the door to a brighter future for all Americans by guaranteeing – more clearly than ever before – that American citizens, regardless of race, had the fundamental right to choose their leaders and to make their voices heard in the halls of government.

“In the 45 years since the Voting Rights Act became law, America has become a more equal nation. Through the enforcement of this law and others that protect the rights of Americans and through the striking down of laws that prevented many Americans from fully exercising their rights, we have empowered Americans of all backgrounds to more fully realize the promise of our nation.

“But as a former civil rights lawyer, I know there remains progress to be made. While our country and our government are now more diverse than ever before, we must continue to defend and protect Americans against discrimination. We must continue to vigorously protect the rights of voters to cast their ballots. And we must continue to work toward greater freedom and equality in America.

“On this 45th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, I would like to join with President Obama and individuals across America in celebrating the progress that has been made to guarantee Americans’ civil rights, in expressing my gratitude to all those Americans who put their lives on the lines to fight for those rights, and in recommitting to advocating for and defending the voting rights that make possible self governance that is at the heart of American democracy.”

“I am proud to stand with voters, candidates, fair election advocates and Democrats across the country in applauding today’s decision by the Supreme Court to uphold the ban on soft money contributions to political parties. By reaffirming campaign finance limits on soft money contributions to political party committees, the Court has rightly maintained a key limitation on corporate influence over this country’s system of free and fair elections.

“It is not surprising, however, that the same Republican Party that has sought to protect Wall Street, BP and the health insurance industry over the wishes of hard-working Americans would wage a campaign to increase the voice and power of corporations – their biggest constituents – in our elections process. In response to their efforts, we must work to ensure that special interests do not overtake the voice of the American people. That is why the Democratic Party is strongly supporting the DISCLOSE Act which passed the U.S. House of Representatives last week and includes provisions establishing tough new rules to limit corporate and special interest influence.

“Restrictions on corporate influence in our elections are an essential foundation of our democracy and limits on campaign spending are not only constitutional but necessary to keeping our elections fair and open. Today’s ruling is another step toward ensuring that the voices of individual voters and candidates will not be drowned-out by the power of special interests.”

The NVRA establishes procedures and safeguards for removing (or “purging”) voters from state registration lists to ensure that voters are not erroneously or unlawfully purged. Among these protections is the requirement that a state not purge a voter from the lists unless that voter fails to respond to a registration cancellation notice and does not vote in two consecutive federal general elections. Michigan violated these rules by removing voters if a registration card was returned as undeliverable – disenfranchising those “whose cards [were] returned…due to postal error, clerical error, inadvertent routing within a multi unit dwelling, and even simple misspelling or transposition of numbers in an address,” according to the ACLU and Advancement Project.

The groups also challenged the state’s purging of voters who applied for a driver’s license in another state. The Secretary of State removed from the rolls voters who had applied for an out-of-state driver’s license, although there are valid reasons why a voter might apply for another license and still maintain Michigan residency.

As the ACLU has noted:

“These populations tend to be more transient and to live in multi-family housing or in dormitory settings where mail can be unreliable and unpredictable. Students often have driver's licenses from different states than where their colleges are located.”

This settlement strongly signals that states’ voter purge procedures must conform to federal laws including the Voting Rights Act, the National Voter Registration Act, and the Help America Vote Act. Please join the Democratic National Committee in continuing to support these protections for voters and in advocating for the voting rights of all eligible persons.

On Sunday we commemorate the courage and sacrifice of 600 men and women who dared 45 years ago to take the first steps in a 54-mile march from Selma, Alabama, to the state capital, Montgomery, for the right to vote. That day, Sunday, March 7, 1965, would come to be known as "Bloody Sunday."

As these unarmed civil rights patriots attempted to cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, where fewer than one percent of eligible black voters were allowed to register, they were gassed and beaten with billy clubs by state and local police, some on horseback, ordered to break up the demonstration.

Captured by television cameras and broadcast nationwide, the suffering of these nonviolent activists, 50 of whom required hospitalization, awoke the nation's consciousness to the importance of voting rights and the entire civil rights movement.

Within 10 days, President Johnson would send a bill to Congress, the National Voting Rights Act of 1965, that would outlaw the discriminatory Jim Crow-era practices that had long worked to disenfranchise African-Americans and other minorities across the United States.

Brazile then goes on to detail some of the current fights in states across the country:

Last month, voting rights advocates filed suit against Virginia state election officials, following the advocates' investigation of rejected voter registration applications in 2008 from students at historically African-American Norfolk State University and the state officials' subsequent refusal to make certain voter registration records publicly available.

While Virginia was rejecting minority voter registrations in 2008, Colorado was purging voters from its registration rolls. Earlier this year, Colorado settled a lawsuit brought by Mi Familia Vota and other voting rights advocates. As a result of the Colorado suit, usage of lists of purged voters was stayed and the approximately 31,000 voters illegally removed from the registration lists were permitted to cast provisional ballots in the 2008 presidential election.

Forty-five years after Bloody Sunday, another march is under way, but it aims to turn back the clock on voting rights. Last month, the South Carolina state Senate passed legislation to require voters to show a photo ID before casting a ballot -- a measure that disproportionately excludes low-income, minority, elderly, and student voters, all of whom are less likely than majority voters to have ready access to a government-issued photo ID.

Brazile closes by highlighting several ways to improve our voting system, making sure every eligible voter has the right to have their vote counted:

We should start by modernizing the voter registration system by making it more automated and keeping eligible voters on the rolls permanently. We should take voting out of the artificial confines created by a limited and literal "Election Day" by providing for universal early voting.

To live up to our constitutional mandate to continue to form a more perfect union -- and to truly honor the brave men and women who marched and were beaten and bloodied, and especially those who were murdered defending their right to vote -- we have the duty to ensure that every eligible voter has an equal and meaningful opportunity to cast a ballot and have it counted.

Read the full op-ed on CNN.

The Democratic Party continues the fight for voting rights year-round. As we know too well, these struggles are not a thing of the past: Minority voters in particular still encounter obstacles at every step of the voting process, from registration to casting a ballot. Practices such as photo identification laws that respond to the made-up problem of voter fraud disproportionately exclude low-income and minority voters.

We are making definite progress -- but we won't stop working to promote a system of elections that is accessible, open, and fair in upcoming elections and beyond -- and ensure that every vote lawfully cast is counted.

You can read the statement from DNC Chairman Tim Kaine commemorating today's anniversary of Bloody Sunday below:

“This weekend marks the 45th anniversary of Bloody Sunday, where some 600 civil rights marchers attempted to walk from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama. They had only made it about six blocks, to the Edmund Pettus Bridge, when the marchers were met with tear gas and beaten by state and local officers with clubs. Horrific images from that day broadcast on television left an indelible mark on the American people. Later that year, President Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965, putting an end to poll taxes, literacy tests, and other efforts to keep minorities from voting.

“We have certainly come a long way since Selma. Last year, more than four decades after Bloody Sunday, our first African American President, Barack Obama, was sworn into office. For many, his Presidency represents the achievement of Dr. Martin Luther King’s dream. But as we acknowledge how far we have come, we cannot allow ourselves to think our work is over to breaking down barriers for all Americans.

“Even today, decades after Jim Crow laws were struck down and four years after the Voting Rights Act was renewed, too many Americans still face discrimination at the polls and people are treated unfairly because of who they are or what they believe. That is why the President and the Democrats at all levels of government are committed to ensuring that every eligible American is able to cast a vote and have their vote counted. And it’s why the President and the Justice Department are making fighting discrimination a priority. President Obama’s signing of the Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which is named in part for James Byrd, who was dragged to his death behind a pickup truck in Texas because of the color of his skin, was just one step in the right direction.

“But there is more work to do. As we remember the brave men and women who marched 45 years ago, let us renew our commitment to ensuring that all Americans – regardless of race, color and creed – are able to live free from fear or discrimination and able to achieve the American Dream.”

Last November the RNC went to court to challenge the decree, arguing that the party’s so-called “ballot security” programs are essential to preventing voter fraud. In rejecting these arguments, the court found that there is “no indication” that voter registration fraud threatens the integrity of elections, noting that the RNC was “unable to point to a single instance in which an individual actually voted using … a fictitious identity.”

Instead, the court called the RNC’s “ballot security” measures —including compiling lists to challenge minority voters at the polls— “politically-motivated” and found that they “result in the disenfranchisement of many individuals whose eligibility is not in question.”

In a joint statement released following the judge’s decision, DNC Chair Tim Kaine and Vice Chair Donna Brazile said:

“For years, Republicans have engaged in deplorable practices that intimidate voters and make it more difficult for them to cast their ballot. This is wrong, and it is illegal. As the court made clear, these types of actions stand in the way of Americans’ fundamental rights under the Constitution of the United States.

...These are not the ideals that our country was founded on, and they should not be tolerated. We applaud yesterday’s decision and recommit ourselves to fighting to ensure that the right to vote is fully protected.”

Click here to read Chairman Kaine and Vice Chair Brazile’s full statement.

Click here to read the judge’s full decision.

“Yesterday's ruling is a victory for all Americans who believe that every eligible citizen should have the right to vote and have their vote counted. It also represents a resounding repudiation of the Republican Party's trumped up claims of voter fraud. Our great nation was founded on the principles of equality and freedom, and our founders envisioned the right to vote as central to our ideals. Yet for years, Republicans have engaged in deplorable practices that intimidate voters and make it more difficult for them to cast their ballot.

“This is wrong, and it is illegal. As the court made clear, these types of actions stand in the way of Americans’ fundamental rights under the Constitution of the United States. Republicans would be better served trying to engage minority and under-represented voters rather than trying to intimidate them. Yet there is overwhelming evidence that these types of practices still occur, that Republicans have engaged in them in recent elections and that without a consent decree barring such actions Republicans will continue to have an incentive to engage in them. That Republicans, who attempted to use foreclosure lists in the 2008 election to deny people the right to vote in Michigan, even asked the court to nullify this decree, shows just how eager they are to continue engaging in practices to suppress the rightful votes of thousands of American citizens.

“These are not the ideals that our country was founded on, and they should not be tolerated. We applaud yesterday’s decision and recommit ourselves to fighting to ensure that the right to vote is fully protected. And we encourage Republicans to work with us to reform our electoral system to remove any impediments to voting and to ensure our voting rights laws are enforced consistent with the law.”

The law, co-sponsored by Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), will make it easier for American military service members and citizens overseas to vote and make sure that their votes are counted. By some estimates as many as one in four ballots requested by voters overseas was not counted during the 2008 election. The law takes effect in 2010.

Specifically, the legislation will make voter registration applications, absentee ballot applications and blank ballots available electronically, require that ballots are sent to overseas voters no less than 45 days before Election Day, and eliminate the requirement that military and overseas ballots be notarized (in the states that still require it). It will also give more Americans the opportunity to use the Federal Write-In Absentee Ballot, which is currently available online and can serve as a “back-up” measure, if a local absentee ballot does not arrive in time.

The Pew Center on the States has a good write up on the issue. Read it here.

6/1/09 – Update – The U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has rejected two Georgia election administration procedures enacted in 2007 with the purported purpose of verifying the identities and citizenship of voters. DOJ found that the state had failed to prove that the procedures would not have a retrogressive effect on minority voters. Georgia is one of nine states with a history of discrimination that are required by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to submit all new voting procedures to DOJ or a federal court for “preclearance” prior to implementation. Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel, a Republican, did not submit the two procedures for federal review until after a coalition of voting rights groups, representing a naturalized citizen in Georgia, filed suit.

The rejected procedures used state and federal databases to verify the identities and citizenship of voter registration applicants and, in some cases, to verify the citizenship of existing registered voters. One of the procedures flagged persons as non-citizens based upon conflicting records from the Georgia voter registration database and the state’s Department of Driver Services (DDS), and required these persons to submit additional proof of their citizenship before voting. Under the second procedure -- a “no match, no vote” program -- the Secretary of State’s office would reject the voter registrations of persons who provided personal information that did not match records from the Social Security Administration or DDS databases. The Help America Vote Act of 2002, which Congress enacted to improve election administration, does not require voters to supply proof of citizenship, and instances of non-citizens voting are rare to non-existent. When such an aberration has occurred, it typically resulted from a mistake or confusion about eligibility.

Secretary of State Handel had asserted that the procedures were necessary to ensure the integrity of the electoral process. But DOJ found that Georgia had incorrectly identified thousands of eligible voters as non-citizens and that those flagged for additional scrutiny were overwhelmingly African American, Latino, or Asian American. DOJ concluded that minority voters were improperly subjected to higher burdens on their right to register and vote, in violation of the Voting Rights Act. Voting rights advocates are applauding DOJ’s continued affirmation of the Act and its rejection of Georgia’s discriminatory voter verification practices.

8/12/09 – Update – The State of Georgia is appealing the Department of Justice’s rejection of two Georgia voter verification procedures under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Secretary of State Karen Handel said in a statement that she does not “believe there is anything discriminatory in verifying voter information and citizenship.” The Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, one of several voting rights groups that brought suit against Secretary Handel in October 2008, denounced the appeal, expressing its disappointment that she has sought to defend “a flawed, unreliable database system that creates barriers to voting.” DOJ has 60 days to respond to the appeal.

10/16/09 – Update – DOJ has again rejected the two Georgia election administration procedures enacted in 2007 purportedly to verify the identities and citizenship of voters. In a letter sent to Georgia Deputy Attorney General Dennis Dunn earlier this week, Assistant U.S. Attorney General Thomas Perez wrote that he remains “unable to conclude that the State of Georgia has carried its burden of showing that the original voter registration verification program has neither a discriminatory purpose nor a discriminatory effect.” Mr. Perez provided a list of additional information Georgia would need to provide for the Justice Department to consider the state’s changes to the system. Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel has said she will discuss the state’s options with state Attorney General Thurbert Baker and Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue. Please join the Democratic National Committee in continuing to support the Voting Rights Act and advancing the voting rights of all eligible persons.

8/12/09 – Update – The State of Georgia is appealing the Department of Justice’s rejection of two Georgia voter verification procedures under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Secretary of State Karen Handel said in a statement that she does not “believe there is anything discriminatory in verifying voter information and citizenship.” The Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, one of several voting rights groups that brought suit against Secretary Handel in October 2008, denounced the appeal, expressing its disappointment that she has sought to defend “a flawed, unreliable database system that creates barriers to voting.” DOJ has 60 days to respond to the appeal.

The U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has rejected two Georgia election administration procedures enacted in 2007 purportedly to verify the identities and citizenship of voters. DOJ found that the state had failed to prove that the procedures would not have a retrogressive effect on minority voters. Georgia is one of nine states with a history of discrimination, which are required by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to submit all new voting procedures to DOJ or a federal court for “preclearance” prior to implementation. Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel, a Republican, did not submit the two procedures for federal review until after a coalition of voting rights groups, representing a naturalized citizen in Georgia, filed suit.

The rejected procedures used state and federal databases to verify the identities and citizenship of voter registration applicants and, in some cases, to verify the citizenship of existing registered voters. One of the procedures flagged persons as non-citizens based upon conflicting records from the Georgia voter registration database and the state’s Department of Driver Services (DDS), and required these persons to submit additional proof of their citizenship before voting. Under the second procedure -- a “no match, no vote” program -- the Secretary of State’s office would reject the voter registrations of persons who provided personal information that did not match records from the Social Security Administration or DDS databases. The Help America Vote Act of 2002, which Congress enacted to improve election administration, does not require voters to supply proof of citizenship, and instances of non-citizens voting are rare to non-existent. When such an aberration has occurred, it typically resulted from a mistake or confusion about eligibility.

Secretary of State Handel had asserted that the procedures were necessary to ensure the integrity of the electoral process. But DOJ found that Georgia had incorrectly identified thousands of eligible voters as non-citizens and that those flagged for additional scrutiny were overwhelmingly African-American, Latino, or Asian-American. DOJ concluded that minority voters were improperly subjected to higher burdens on their right to register and vote, in violation of the Voting Rights Act. Voting rights advocates are applauding DOJ’s continued affirmation of the Act and its rejection of Georgia’s discriminatory voter verification practices.

6/1/09 – Update – The U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has rejected two Georgia election administration procedures enacted in 2007 purportedly to verify the identities and citizenship of voters. DOJ found that the state had failed to prove that the procedures would not have a retrogressive effect on minority voters. Georgia is one of nine states with a history of discrimination, which are required by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to submit all new voting procedures to DOJ or a federal court for “preclearance” prior to implementation. Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel, a Republican, did not submit the two procedures for federal review until after a coalition of voting rights groups, representing a naturalized citizen in Georgia, filed suit.

The rejected procedures used state and federal databases to verify the identities and citizenship of voter registration applicants and, in some cases, to verify the citizenship of existing registered voters. One of the procedures flagged persons as non-citizens based upon conflicting records from the Georgia voter registration database and the state’s Department of Driver Services (DDS), and required these persons to submit additional proof of their citizenship before voting. Under the second procedure -- a “no match, no vote” program -- the Secretary of State’s office would reject the voter registrations of persons who provided personal information that did not match records from the Social Security Administration or DDS databases. The Help America Vote Act of 2002, which Congress enacted to improve election administration, does not require voters to supply proof of citizenship, and instances of non-citizens voting are rare to non-existent. When such an aberration has occurred, it typically resulted from a mistake or confusion about eligibility.

Secretary of State Handel had asserted that the procedures were necessary to ensure the integrity of the electoral process. But DOJ found that Georgia had incorrectly identified thousands of eligible voters as non-citizens and that those flagged for additional scrutiny were overwhelmingly African-American, Latino, or Asian-American. DOJ concluded that minority voters were improperly subjected to higher burdens on their right to register and vote, in violation of the Voting Rights Act. Voting rights advocates are applauding DOJ’s continued affirmation of the Act and its rejection of Georgia’s discriminatory voter verification practices.