Their Secessionist "States Rights" versus Our Collaborative Federalism

There have recently been a wave of rightwing resolutions asserting "state sovereignty," with Governor Rick Perry even evoking Civil War-era rhetoric about Texas having the right to secede from the United States. 

The Rightwing Continues Pre-Civil War Confederate View of Federalism: Most of the resolutions are relatively empty rhetoric repeating the Tenth Amendment's phrasing of powers "reserved to the states respectively, or to the people," sometimes with a few cranky references to illegitimate Federal Reserve power or complaining about infringement on the right to bear arms.  The Georgia Senate went one step further into Southern Confederate rhetoric and approved a resolution that asserts the right of the state to "nullify" federal laws it disagrees with and even declares many federal criminal statutes void.

What the resolutions share, unsurprisingly, is a focus on a Tenth Amendment that originally justified slavery and Confederate secession, while the resolutions studiously ignore the existence of a 14th Amendment (along with other post-Civil War amendments) that explicitly gave the Congress new powers to supersede state laws and put to rest these kinds of secessionist and nullification-style interpretations of the original Constitution.  As this Brennan Center for Justice report from a few years ago outlines, any focus on Constitutional "original intent" must focus on the intent of the authors of those post-Civil War Amendments and recognize the broad federal powers intended to rectify the harms created by slavery and other social ills that festered in the pre-Civil War constitutional era.  

The Alternative Progressive Demand for Collaborative Federalism:  That said, there is a long progressive tradition of demanding that the federal government respect state authority that does not conflict with federal laws.  As we wrote in Restoring State Authority: An Agenda to Restrict Preemption of State Laws, the real problem is that too often, even when Congress has not explicitly legislated against state powers, the executive branch and the courts have used loose interpretations of those statutes to void state laws meant to protect consumers, workers and the environment. 

The irony is that so many of the rightwing activists who have suddenly discovered the abuses of federal power were silent over the last eight years as the Bush administration and the conservative courts voided state laws designed to stop the sub-prime mortgage mess, protect labor rights, or generally restrain corporate abuses. 

Instead of talking about secession and playing a game of which level of government has responsibility for protecting the public's health, safety and economic well-being, the progressive view of federalism is that we should maximize collaboration, innovation in policy and protection of individual rights by all levels of government.  The federal courts and Presidency should defer to state authority, unless there has been an explicit decision by the Congress to preempt that local authority -- which itself should be rare.  Federal laws and regulations should be a floor for consumer, civil rights and worker protections, with the ability of states to create or enforce more expansive protections for individuals strongly protected.

Neo-confederate rhetoric around "states rights" and secession should be condemned, but progressives should be asserting a robust vision of collaborative federalism and a federal government that respects state innovation -- a vision that the Obama administration seems to be embracing to its credit.

Florida Rightwing Attempts to Suppress Voting Rights with Election Restrictions

Just weeks before the end of the legislative session, rightwing lawmakers in Florida are advancing omnibus legislation that progressive voting rights advocates and legislators see as yet another scheme to reduce voter turnout and manipulate election rules to the benefit of conservatives.  The omnibus legislation was sprung on unsuspecting legislators and advocates the day before it was voted on in a Senate committee, where only a few minutes of debate were allowed before a party-line vote. 

Touted as a collection of "anti-fraud" measures, SB 956/HB 7149 the bill is actually designed to put barriers in the way of registering and voting on election day, including:

• Removing identification from retirement centers and neighborhood associations identification from the list of acceptable voter ID which would have a devastating impact on elderly and disabled voters.
• First-time voters would not be able prove their identity at the polls on election day, but would have to provide it before election day, a requirement that no other state has.
• Requiring voter registration forms collected by third parties to be submitted within 48 hours of when they are filled out.  This provision and the associated penalties would effectively shut down independent voter registration drives in Florida, something the state has tried to do before.
• Force voters who move within a month of election day to vote by provisional ballot.

The bill would also substantially reduce the accountability of politicians and prevent the full and accurate counting of ballots as a matter of policy:

• County party chairmen will have the exclusive right to designate poll watchers.
• People "offering legal advice regarding voting or ballots" are specifically prevented from communicating with voters inside or outside a polling place or in line to vote.
• Political committees registered in other states are exempted from complying with campaign finance laws.
• Slush funds for political leaders to make unregulated donations to other politicians are specifically allowed by the bill, reversing an earlier prohibition.
• Puts a strict, one-week limit on the duration of any post-election audits of ballots; and mandates that elections will be certified a week and a half after a primary and two weeks after a general election, regardless of whether all votes have been counted or recounted.
• Makes the unelected Secretary of State solely responsible for ordering a recount in all but local elections.

Bill Condemned Throughout State: This toxic stew of provisions have raised considerable ire in the state and nationally, with editorial boards, labor leaders, voting rights activists, and lawmakers railing against this naked power grab in the guise of election reform.  Commenting on the less than six minutes of debate and 60 seconds of public input that led to a vote in committee, Rich Templin, executive director of the Florida AFL-CIO, said "[t]hey are certainly violating any premise of good government, any premise of open government, any premise of transparency, or the cornerstones of representative democracy."  Regarding the substance of the measure Templin opined that "[t]his bill should really be called the Florida Democracy Reduction Act. It is designed to reduce people’s participation, to reduce people voting, and to reduce people’s access to the process."  Republican Governor Charlie Crist is unhappy with the legislation's disenfranchising elements.  While not issuing a veto threat, he had the following to say:

"The more opportunity you give people to vote, the better it is for democracy. So that aspect of it concerns me...It always seems to me that when there may be legislation that attempts to sort of make it harder for people to do something — the people that we work for —  generally that’s not good. I don’t look on that in a favorable light and that is true of this particular part of this legislation."

Attempts to twist voting rules to suppress voter turnout are not surprising given the thumping that conservatives have taken at the polls in recent years.  And while Florida is once again leading the pack in shady voting changes, it is in keeping with similar tactics of suppressing voter drives, loosening campaign regulations, and using ID requirements to thwart elderly voters, that have surfaced in other states.

Washington State Legislature and Nevada Assembly Pass National Popular Vote

Following votes in the Washington House and Senate, National Popular Vote now goes to the Governor Chris Gregoire, who has expressed support and whose signature will make Washington the fifth state to enact NPV -- reaching 23% of the the electoral votes needed to go into effect.   

The Nevada Assembly on April 21st became the 27th state legislative chamber overall to approve NPV.