Late last week, national Democrats announced they would be launching a campaign responding to laws across the country that may decrease access to the polls for many for the 2012 election.

U.S. News reports:

DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz accused Republicans of launching a “full-scale attack on the public’s right to vote.” She said that GOP efforts in states to curb instant voter registration and early voting and require photo identification at the polls to fight alleged fraud could push minorities, especially Hispanics and African-Americans, away from voting. She claimed that repeated investigations into voter fraud have found very little evidence that it occurs.

…

The Republican National Committee rejected the charges, however. Officials said there is evidence of voter fraud. In just one popularized case, for example, they note that ACORN—the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now—in 2008 was accused of handling 400,000 fraudulent registrations.

The website, protectingthevote.com, states that “in 2011, a new movement to change the way we vote is under way. Unlike past reforms that sought to expand access to voting, this effort aims to restrict voting purely for partisan gain.”

The website runs through some of the most restrictive new laws in states across the country. The DNC points to laws that “target voter registration drives, cut early voting, repeal election day registration, and create citizen challenges” as the biggest culprits of voter suppression.

The website also has a link to a 73-page report written by the Voting Rights Institute, with help from the DNC. The report singled out Florida as passing some of the most restrictive voting laws, including one law that targets voter-registration drives and another that cuts early voting.

According to the report:

The GOP enacted restrictions on voter registration drives in Florida and Texas, and proposed similar measures in Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, and Mississippi. The new legislation in Florida was by far the GOP’s most extensive effort. In 2010, Republican Governor Rick Scott rode a wave of Tea Party support to victory in the state’s gubernatorial race, joining Republican majorities in the Florida House and Senate. A pinnacle of their collaboration in this year’s legislative session was HB1355, a 158-page omnibus elections overhaul that—in addition to early voting cuts—enacted draconian restrictions on all nongovernmental entities that conduct voter registration.

Under HB1355, any group or individual that conducts voter registration must now (1) register their organization with the Florida Division of Elections prior to conducting registration activities and regularly file onerous reports on all their activities; (2) track and account for voter registration forms using a specially generated number for each document; (3) submit completed voter registration forms to the state within 48 hours (a significant decrease from the previous deadline of 10 days); (4) subject themselves to fines between $50 and $1,000 for registration forms returned to the state after 48 hours; and (5) submit to new enforcement authority from the Florida attorney general.

These restrictions encumber even large and experienced organizations; immediately after HB1355 was passed, the League of Women Voters of Florida suspended its voter registration activities. But these restrictions fall heaviest on small organizations that conduct neighborhood voter registration, lack the capacity to abide by the state’s reporting requirements and tight deadlines, and could be virtually bankrupted under this penalty structure. Already, there are reports of public school teachers who may face huge fines under the new law—all for the supposed offense of helping students register to vote without following each minute requirement of the new law.

Fewer voter registration drives mean fewer voters. But cutting back on voter registration drives does not have the effect of limiting the political participation of all citizens equally. Data from the U.S. Census Bureau demonstrates that African American and Hispanic voters are more than twice as likely to register through voter registration drives as are white voters in Florida.

Democrats have also sought congressional investigations in order to address these laws. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla.,requested congressional field hearings into the new laws, asking Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., to schedule them. Nelson also sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder requesting that the Justice Department launch an investigation into whether the “new state voting laws resulted from collusion or an orchestrated effort to limit voter turnout.”

Florida is currently waiting for a ruling on the most controversial aspects of H.B. 1355 from a court in the District of Columbia.

Photo: Flickr/hjl

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., has granted Sen. Bill Nelson’s request for field hearings into Florida’s controversial new voting law that many say could disenfranchise minorities, young voters and low-income citizens.

Earlier this month, Nelson sent a letter to Durbin asking him to consider “conducting investigative field hearings” to see if the new voting laws were “an orchestrated effort to disenfranchise voters” in a manner that is possibly illegal.”

Durbin replied in a letter yesterday saying he agrees that “regardless of its state intention, Florida’s new voting law will almost certainly disenfranchise a wide swath of young, minority, senior, disabled, rural and low-income voters.”

“In a democracy as vibrant as ours there is perhaps no right more fundamental or sacred than the right to vote. I am deeply troubled by the disenfranchising impact of these recently passed state voting laws,” he wrote.

Durbin wrote that he will hold a “field hearing of the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights in Florida … that will explore the impact of the Florida law, as well as the impact of similar laws recently passed in neighboring states.”

Nelson also sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder requesting that the Justice Department launch an investigation into whether the “new state voting laws resulted from collusion or an orchestrated effort to limit voter turnout.”

Florida is currently waiting for a ruling on controversial aspects of the law from a court in the District of Columbia.

Photo credit: Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla. (Pic by jonworth, via Flickr) 

Following Sen. Bill Nelson’s lead, House Democrats from Florida have sent a letter to House leaders requesting hearings on the impact of new state voting laws on voter rights.

The St. Petersburg Times reports that Reps. Alcee Hastings, Corrine Brown, Ted Deutch, Frederica Wilson and Kathy Castor “are seeking a House investigation into new voting laws they contend were designed to make it harder for some people (Democrats) to vote.”

They are joining a list of almost 40 U.S. Representatives who signed the letter (.pdf).

The letter reads:

Congress has the Constitutional authority to act to protect the rights of all voters. In the face of voter suppression laws being enacted across the nation, Congress must determine the extent of the problem and provide appropriate remedies. Despite years of progress, inequities and obstacles still remain. We must work together to strengthen our nation’s democracy and ensure that the voting rights of all Americans are protected. Again, we respectfully request that Committees hold a hearing to address this extremely important matter.

Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., recently requested that the Senate conduct its own hearings. Nelson sent a letter to Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., requesting that he consider “conducting investigative field hearings” to see if the new voting laws were “an orchestrated effort to disenfranchise voters” in a manner that is possibly illegal.

Florida is one of many states that have passed laws making it harder for people to vote and harder for groups to register voters. Opponents of the new laws say the rules will make it more difficult for minorities and young people — largely considered a part of the Democratic base — to vote in the upcoming election.

Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., has been one of the most active opponents of the new laws. He recently sent a letter to Holder requesting that the Justice Department launch an investigation into whether the “new state voting laws resulted from collusion or an orchestrated effort to limit voter turnout.” He sent the letter days after requesting a congressional hearing on the matter.

TPM reports:

“This Department of Justice will be aggressive at looking at this jurisdictions that have attempted for whatever reason to restrict the ability of people to get to the polls,” Holder said at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) — who chaired a hearing on attempts to place restrictions on voting rights through measures like voter ID, shortening early voting periods and limiting the capabilities of groups trying to run voter registation drives — asked Holder what DOJ was doing to ensure voters weren’t disenfranchised.

“I think a fundamental question is raised: who are we as a nation?” Holder said. “Shouldn’t we be coming up with ways to encourage more people to get to the polls to express their views?” he continued.

“I am not talking about any one particular state effort, but more generally I think for those who would consider trying to use methods, techniques to discourage people from coming to the polls — that’s inconsistent with what we say we are as a nation,” Holder said.

Florida is currently waiting for a ruling on controversial aspects of its law from a court in the District of Columbia. Five counties in Florida require federal preclearance of voting laws per the Voting Rights Act.

Last week, 196 members of Congress, including six from Florida’s delegation, signed a letter sent to secretaries of state all over the country expressing their disapproval of new voting restrictions.

With the 2012 elections looming, Florida and other states have passed a slew of laws that make it harder for people to vote and harder for groups to register voters. Opponents of the new laws say the rules will make it harder for minorities and young people — largely been considered a significant part of the Democratic base — to vote in the upcoming election.

The office of Democratic Whip Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., announced that he “led a letter sent to Secretaries of State today urging them to oppose new state measures adopted over the last year that would make it harder for eligible voters to register or vote.”

“A year from now, millions of Americans will head to the polls to exercise their most fundamental right – the right to vote,” Hoyer said in a press release. “Unfortunately, in states across the country, partisan measures have been adopted that would make it more difficult for nearly five million voters, particularly the poor, young people, the elderly, and minorities, to register and vote.”

“Voter suppression has no place in our country,” Hoyer said. “That’s why Democrats are sending a letter to Secretaries of State urging them to oppose these partisan efforts to hinder access to the ballot and urging them to work in a bipartisan way to ensure all Americans can exercise their constitutional right to be heard.”

In the letter to the secretaries of state, House Democrats wrote:

A disturbing trend is emerging. Election legislation and administration appear to be increasingly the product of partisan plays. Election officials are seen as partisan combatants, rather than stewards of our democracy. It is critical for our democracy that this does not continue. Voting hours, voting sites, identification requirements, voter registration regulation and access to mail ballots should not be used as weapons to achieve a preferred electoral outcome.

We are asking you, as front line participants in this process, to put partisan considerations aside and serve as advocates for enfranchisement. Critical to your role is the fair presentation and evaluation of the costs and benefits associated with any proposed change in election administration. We ask that you be vigilant in protecting against fraud but equally vigilant in protecting the franchise for all our citizens. History has taught us that our democracy has suffered far more from elected officials who chose to deny some of our citizens the opportunity to vote than from any other cause. There is no greater threat to our democracy than a diminished belief that the rules are fair and fairly administered.

The letter sent today was signed by six Florida Democrats: Corrine Brown, Kathy Castor, Alcee Hastings, Ted Deutch, Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Frederica Wilson.

House Democrats are not the only Florida lawmakers fighting the laws. This week Sen. Bill Nelson wrote to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder requesting that the Justice Department launch an investigation into whether the “new state voting laws resulted from collusion or an orchestrated effort to limit voter turnout.” He also sent a letter to Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., asking him to consider “conducting investigative field hearings” to see if the new voting laws were “an orchestrated effort to disenfranchise voters” in a manner that is possibly illegal.

Florida is currently waiting for a ruling on controversial aspects of the law from a court in the District of Columbia.

In a letter sent to Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Nelson asked him to consider “conducting investigative field hearings” to see if the new voting laws were “an orchestrated effort to disenfranchise voters” in a manner that is possibly illegal.

In the letter, Nelson spoke of a recent case involving New Smyrna Beach High School civics teacher Jill Cicciarelli.

In a press release, Nelson wrote that “when [Cicciarelli] organized a drive at the start of this school year to get her students pre-registered to vote, she ran afoul of Florida’s new law. Cicciarelli hadn’t registered with the state before beginning the drive and didn’t submit the students’ registration forms to the elections office within 48 hours. Under the law, voter registration activities such as hers could result in hefty fines.”

Nelson also mentioned the involvement of a conservative group called the American Legislative Exchange Council (known as ALEC) in the prevalence of these voting laws around the country.

“Many of the newly enacted voting laws came concomitant with model legislation to toughen voting requirements crafted by a conservative advocacy group called ALEC,” he wrote. “ALEC is backed by wealthy conservative activists and major corporate special interests. It’s founder, Paul Weyrich, once was quoted as saying, ‘I don’t want everybody to vote. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.’”

Opponents of Florida’s law have said the laws are aimed at surpressing the vote of minorities and young people for the upcoming 2012 election. Cicciarelli’s case could be an example of how the youth vote might be particularly affected by the laws.

“No state should have the right to make a law if it abridges people’s basic rights,” Nelson said in his speech before the Senate.

Florida is currently waiting for a ruling on controversial aspects of the law from a court in the District of Columbia.

Dressed in college graduation caps and gowns with the colors and logos of many different universities on display, the undocumented youth heard testimony from some of their peers who are currently facing deportation, as well as an ‘invocation’ by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, and a ‘commencement address’ from Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Jose Antonio Vargas, who recently revealed in the pages of New York Times Magazine that he was undocumented and entered the country illegally when he was a child.

Many of the young people who spoke echoed Vargas’ story of having to live a life in secret, avoiding the authorities and situations requiring legal documentation at all cost. The event’s ‘valedictorian’, Mandeep Chahal, is an undocumented immigrant born in India who is an honors student at UC Davis and has lived in California since she was six; nevertheless, she was scheduled to be deported after her mother was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) last year. Chahal and her mother lived for months with electronic monitoring bracelets around their ankles, but last Tuesday, they were granted a reprieve by ICE after a Facebook campaign mobilized in favor of allowing Chahal to stay — and after ICE director John Morton issued a memo encouraging discretion on the part of immigration officials when deciding who to deport.

As The Florida Independent reported, there is no good estimate of how many people who might qualify for legalization under the DREAM Act are currently undergoing deportation proceedings. What is certain is that the Obama administration has been deporting more people per year than any other administration, and half of the people deported have committed no crime other than being in the country without authorization. The graduation ceremony came the day after the first Senate committee hearing on the DREAM Act, where two cabinet-level Obama administration officials, Dept. of Education secretary Arne Duncan and Dept. of Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano, testified in favor of the DREAM Act’s passage. In a press conference today, President Obama reiterated his support for the bill.

However, Chahal and other speakers at today’s ceremony repeatedly emphasized the power of the executive branch to alleviate the risk of deportation for law-abiding undocumented immigrants: “President Obama has made it clear that he fully supports the DREAM Act… and yet he hasn’t acted,” Chahal said. “He has the power to stop the deportations of people like me. He can bring relief so that no family has to go through what mine has. He can end our pain, but he still continues to deport DREAMers.”

Sen. Durbin also argued that the role of the executive branch is critical, but called Morton’s memo unprecedented: “They [the Obama administration] came up with this important memo, which for the first time puts in writing that they are going to establish a policy of deportation which will take into consideration those who will be eligible for the DREAM Act… we are going to hold them to this promise, that they are for education not deportation.”

Despite the support of Durbin and Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the majority whip and leader of the Senate, respectively, the DREAM Act has little chance of becoming law this congressional term, given the Republican-controlled House’s general opposition to legalization and citizenship for undocumented immigrants. Last week, House Judiciary Chair Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said he would introduce a bill invalidating the Morton memo, which would presumably mean that ICE would have no choice but to deport Vargas, Chahal and the other undocumented youth present at the ceremony.

Nevertheless, after the ceremony the ‘deportation class of 2011’ marched not towards the House of Representatives office buildings, but towards the White House.

As the federal government nears a shutdown, scheduled to begin in just over 13 hours, latest reports on negotiations between the House and Senate, led by Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), respectively, posit that the two sides are close on a dollar amount to cut from the 2011 budget — about $5 billion, according to the Washington Post.

But the other main issue holding up an agreement are “riders” — used by Congress to change policy in a budget bill without going through committee channels — to the bill, including one to defund Planned Parenthood and strip all Title X funding, which provides for family planning and related preventive health services.

So while Reid and Senate Democrats want to lose the riders and claim the GOP is using the budget to hammer away at long-fought ideological battles, House Republicans aren’t budging, as Boehner insists the two sides are haggling mainly over the amount of money to cut, not social issues.

Brian Beutler at TPM with the latest:

Negotiations between Democrats and Republicans to avoid a government shutdown ended for the night a few hours ago without a breakthrough. Still bedeviling the talks is the issue of abortion. Republicans want a bill to fund the government for six months to eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood and Democrats won’t allow it. But according to Republicans, there may be some flexibility on the riders if Democrats would pony up a few billion dollars more in cuts — and, according to one top Republican aide, they’ve drawn the line at $34.5 billion in cuts to current spending.

That’s at least in part because of the composition of the cuts. Republicans propose giving the Pentagon $2 billion more than Defense Secretary Robert Gates has requested. That additional spending puts additional pressure on domestic discretionary programs, which are taking the brunt of the cuts.

Late last night, after a White House meeting with President Obama and key aides, House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid released a joint statement signaling progress. A Democratic source briefed on negotiations said the two were very close to agreement.

Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim takes a closer look at the fight over social issues and points to older, more experienced Republicans as the ones pushing for keeping the riders, not freshmen GOPers associated with the tea party.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the number-two Democrat in the upper chamber, said that Boehner was under pressure on social issues not from the Tea Party, but from senior Republicans. “It’s not about reducing the deficit. It’s about hitting programs. He’s gotta cut programs. And we think still we can reach agreement on the money. But he is under enormous pressure and he says it’s not from the Tea Party, it’s from the old guard, the Republican guard, that wants to once and for all show that they can force through some of these social issues, like abortion,” Durbin told reporters Thursday evening in the Capitol. “The rider list gets longer and longer and non-negotiable.”

A GOP aide confirmed Durbin’s claim that it’s the senior members who are insisting on riders. Polls show that the public is likely to blame the Tea Party for any shutdown, but ironically, most new members are more passionate about spending than social issues. Yet the public is likely to conflate the Tea Party with the culture wars if the government ultimately shuts down due to a dispute over funding for family planning.

“It’s mostly a few older members who have seen an opportunity,” said the GOP aide. “If you were to ask the freshmen individually, only a few would say this is all about the riders. And even amongst that smaller group, they would be split,” with some focused on the EPA and others on restricting funds for health care.

“The true Tea Party guys in our conference are all about spending. That’s it. Whatever the final deal is — even if we got [the National Right to Life Committee] to score it — we’d lose some guys because it didn’t meet the full $100 billion,” the aide added.

HuffPost spoke to a number of GOP freshmen, many of whom said they were more committed to funding cuts than policy riders. Although most voted for Republican-sponsored policy riders, some said they were willing to compromise as long as the final figure for cuts was large enough.

Negotiations will continue throughout today. Speaker Boehner is scheduled to brief reporters on the latest developments from his perspective at approximately 10:30 a.m. EST.

Update: Here’s a link to video of Boehner’s brief remarks.

“Allowing undocumented students to attend primary and secondary schools but requiring that they pay out-of-state tuition for college creates an unfair financial burden that many, even very talented, students cannot overcome,” Diaz-Balart said in a press release. “We should stop hampering these deserving students’ educational opportunities due to the decisions of their parents and allow a vote on the American DREAM Act.”

I explain some of the votes up in the air in our preview of the lame-duck session today. Pelosi has said she hopes to call for a vote on the bill, as has Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). But so far, it’s unclear whether the Democratic leadership has the votes to pass the bill, with some members of the Democratic caucus likely to break with the party to vote against the bill.

For immigrant rights groups, the stakes are high: If the DREAM Act cannot pass with Democrat majorities in both the House and the Senate, it will almost certainly be delayed until at least 2013, when Democrats could again take control of Congress. Immigrant rights groups are stepping up their efforts by staging protests and lobbying politicians to vote for the bill.

One reason supporters want the bill passed this year, beyond the obvious desire to provide more immediate relief to undocumented immigrants, is to prevent further problems with the DREAM Act’s age constraints. The current bill would allow undocumented immigrants who had attended two years of college or served in the military for two years to gain legal status if they had a clean permanent record and were under the age of 35.

For some, that age sounds too high — people who are in their 30s may no longer be students, whom the bill is theoretically meant to help. But Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the chief sponsor of the bill, said in October he wants to help those the bill was initially aimed at when it first came up in 2001 — some of whom may now be reaching the upper age limits of the bill.

If the bill is delayed, future efforts could raise the upper age cutoff — at the risk of losing some votes — or would no longer benefit those immigrants, some of whom have been advocating for the bill for years.

Reid claims his caucus is behind him on the act, which would give some undocumented students and military service members a change to gain legal status to remain in the country. “We all support the DREAM Act,” he said on Univision in an interview that aired Sunday. “I just need a handful of Republicans to help me.”

Kirk has said he wouldn’t, despite exhaustive efforts by DREAM Act supporters to convince him otherwise. “This is not the time to do that,” Kirk said in a debate.

How important is Kirk’s vote for passing the DREAM Act? It depends on who Reid means when he says “we all support the DREAM Act.” There are 59 senators who caucus with the Democrats and 41 Republicans. Kirk will change those numbers to 58 and 42. Reid needs 60 votes to overcome a filibuster if he hopes to pass the DREAM Act.

If Reid’s right about his caucus, he would only need two Republicans to vote “yes” on the DREAM Act. Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) co-sponsored the bill and would almost certainly vote for the it as a standalone measure, although he voted in September to filibuster the defense authorization bill that included it. Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah) has also said he would vote for the act as a standalone bill.

But if either of them or any Democrats fall through, other Republicans are tougher to pin down. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who was one of the original sponsors of the DREAM Act, seems likely to vote against it now because he favors a borders-first approach to tackling immigration problems. “The American people want the government to secure our borders, create jobs and reduce the deficit.” Hatch said when he announced plans to vote against the DREAM Act’s inclusion in the defense authorization bill.

Lugar, Hatch and Bennett were two of twelve Republicans who voted for the DREAM Act in 2007. The others still in Senate — Sam Brownback (R-Kans.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) — have been vague about whether they would support the measure as a standalone this year.

When the bill came up as a possible addition to the defense authorization bill, a few Democrats said they were not sure they would support it this time around. Sens. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) and Mary Landrieu (D-La.) told The Hill in September they might vote “no” on the DREAM Act.