As North Dakota's legislative session moves forward, additional debate is expected on a controversial voting bill, which calls for proof of citizenship to cast a ballot.

At issue is whether someone who recently became a naturalized citizen, but whose identification has yet to reflect their status, should be required to provide additional documentation.

Barbara Headrick, president of the League of Women Voters of North Dakota, worries it would disenfranchise New Americans from going back to the polls in future elections.

"This is a bill trying to correct a problem that doesn't exist," Headrick argued. "There aren't people trying to vote by pretending to be citizens. And the unintended consequences can be turning away people who have every right to vote."

The Heritage Foundation has documented only three cases of election fraud in North Dakota over the past decade, and none involved a noncitizen trying to vote. Citizenship bills have surfaced in both the House and Senate this session. One has cleared the House. The Senate bill's co-sponsor argues North Dakota should not wait for cases to pop up in the future, while pointing to precautionary steps such as temporary ballots pending additional documentation.

Some voters of color were turned away during last year's primary after not having additional documentation with them. It prompted an opinion from the state attorney general stating North Dakota law does not allow poll workers to demand proof.

Headrick noted it is a reminder of the dilemma such voters face.

"Some people become citizens just within weeks of the first chance to vote," Headrick stressed. "With North Dakota not having voter registration, we don't want to block their efforts to do so. "

The League of Women Voters, along with the group North Dakota Native Vote, say the proposals serve as a reminder of the barriers created for Indigenous voters when the state's 2017 Voter ID law was approved.

As for the proposed citizenship bill, North Dakota's Secretary of State warned about unintended consequences, but still testified in support of the measure.

Arizonans could vote on a proposal next year some advocates said would make politics more equitable in the Grand Canyon State.

This week, the Make Elections Fair Arizona committee, made up of Republicans, Democrats and Independents, filed a citizens' initiative to amend the Arizona Constitution. It would require the state's future primary elections to be open to all candidates and voters, regardless of party affiliation. Arizona currently conducts partisan primaries.

Sarah Smallhouse, chair of the committee, said it is a challenge for independent or unaffiliated candidates and for the largest registered voter bloc in the state.

"It's fundamentally a question of fairness, of giving everyone an equal opportunity to participate in our political system without having to go through extra steps," Smallhouse contended. "For example, Independent candidates right now have to collect six times as many signatures to be on a General Election ballot."

Smallhouse pointed out unaffiliated and third-party voters pay taxes to fund the current partisan political system, leading to what her group sees as voter disenfranchisement. She acknowledged they expect to get pushback on the proposal from the major parties.

Beau Lane, co-chair of the committee, said the move could empower voters and lead to higher turnout. He noted Independents are often left feeling overlooked and not represented. Lane argued the proposal would also foster healthier competition among candidates, and cultivate what he called more of a "problem-solving approach," instead of, in his words, "the politics of contempt."

"You know, they want to look at the other side as the enemy and not somebody that they could actually cooperate with and get good policy put in place for the State of Arizona," Lane emphasized. "Polling indicates that is about where 70% of the people in Arizona want that type of political activity, of problem-solving."

The initiative has been filed with the Arizona Secretary of State. It will be reviewed and recommendations will be made to the committee. It should be finalized by the end of October, when the group can then work on gathering the estimated 500,000 signatures needed by next June to get it onto the November 2024 ballot.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article incorrectly spelled the name 'Erlinghauser' as two words instead of one. (11:24 a.m. MDT, Sept. 20, 2023)


Voting advocacy organizations in Connecticut are calling on Gov. Ned Lamont to ensure the state's election infrastructure is ready for the 2024 presidential election.

The groups, including the ACLU and the League of Women Voters, said too many voting tabulation machines are defective and cause delays at polling stations.

John Erlingheuser, senior advocacy director for AARP Connecticut, said they are outdated and unreliable.

"They don't manufacture them anymore," he explained. "They break down frequently. People are having to get replacement parts for the voting machines on things like eBay."

Erlingheuser pointed out the legislature approved a bill allowing the state to borrow more than $25 million to replace the vote tabulators but Lamont and other members of the State Bond Commission must hold a formal vote to spend the money.

Voting rights groups say Connecticut has made some recent strides in improving access to the ballot, including the recent approval of early voting, and the restoration of voting rights to people on parole.

He noted new tabulator machines are needed to support those accomplishments and handle the volume of voters expected for next year's presidential election.

"We have a pretty good history here in Connecticut," Erlingheuser acknowledged. "This will only enhance that and make people feel more confident that when they cast their ballot it's private, and it will be counted."

Election officials said newer, high-speed machines allow poll workers to quickly process large stacks of ballots or handle absentee ballots, which are often folded when received by a town clerk. The current tabulators often jam when fed folded paper, creating long lines on Election Day and potentially leading to the shutdown of polling sites.

Today is National Voter Registration Day and in addition to urging you to check your registration advocates are making the case for lowering the voting age.

While typically less attention is paid to voting in off-year elections, there are still ballots in many localities, and in some of those Marylanders as young as 16 can vote.

Five cities in Maryland allow 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in local elections. In November, voters in Rockville can participate in a nonbinding referendum on lowering the voting age to 16.

Alyssa Canty, director of youth programs for Common Cause, said young people are often beginning to see the effects of civic policy.

"When they're 16- or 17-year-olds, they are starting their first part-time jobs," Canty pointed out. "So they now have income, so they're purchasing things, so they are paying sales tax, but they have no say in what happens to those tax dollars."

At the state level, any Marylander can register at age 16 but cannot vote in state or federal elections until they reach 18.

Maryland state law permits city councils to lower the voting age at the local level, and so far Takoma Park, Greenbelt, Hyattsville, Riverdale Park and Mount Rainier have done so. In Somerset, 16-year-olds will be able to vote in local elections beginning next May.

Canty sees late high school as a good time to engage young people.

"Usually around 16, 17 years old, that junior, senior year of high school, that's also when you take your really in-depth civics class, and you learn about how the government works," Canty explained. "It's almost like experimental learning where you get to actually go and cast a ballot."

Canty noted as campaigns have spread across the country, they often see young people taking the lead on the issue.

"We have seen where young people are energized by this issue," Canty pointed out. "In many places, they're the ones that are on the forefront leading this work because they see themselves as being really impacted by local elections, by their school boards, by their city councils."

For more information on the effort, visit Vote16USA.org.


get more stories like this via email