Search Results for: gessler

Crossposted from Colorado Pols

The latest move by Colorado’s controversial Secretary of State Scott Gessler, which, make no mistake, will have the effect of reducing the number of votes cast in future elections, is nevertheless a little more complex than meets the eye–KDVR’s Eli Stokols reports:

“The City of Denver has consistently provided all eligible voters with ease of access to the voting franchise and we continue to do so,” [Denver Clerk and Recorder Debra] Johnson said in a statement of her own.

“This is a fundamental issue of fairness and keeping voting accessible to as many eligible voters as possible.”

In Gessler’s view, it’s currently against the law for county clerks to mail ballots to inactive voters; even though Johnson points out Denver has done so in its five previous mail ballot elections.

Gessler cites a state statute that reads: “the designated election official shall mail to each active registered elector.”

In a sign of a possible Denver Post editorial to come, Editorial Page Editor Curtis Hubbard tweeted Monday night: “Sorry, but I don’t see ‘ONLY active voters’ in statute. [Pols emphasis]

Gessler, who was unsuccessful in advancing legislation earlier this year that would have required photo ID to register to vote, drawing strong criticism from progressive groups, said he’s not trying to limit turnout in the state’s most populated and heavily Democratic city…

But of course that’s what the bottom line is–Gessler is demanding that counties who adhere to an inclusive standard of providing ballots to all registered voters, like Denver, instead follow a “lowest common denominator” approach. What Gessler seems to want is adherence to the most restrictive standard possible–mandated denial of mailed ballots to registered voters who may have missed the 2010 elections unless they take affirmative steps to “activate” their registration.

Much like the recent controversy over Gessler’s demands to purge the voters rolls of “suspected” illegal voters, or his rule changes on primary election expenditures that reduce transparency, Gessler is attempting to resolve ambiguity in the law on the side of partisan political goals. Remember, these are not people accused or suspected of any problems with their voter registration–simply listed as “inactive” after having missed one election. With that in mind, Gessler has a major credibility problem trying to force a change this significant: an indelible, wholly self-inflicted partisan reputation that casts everything he does in suspicion–especially actions, like this one, that will result in fewer registered and eligible voters participating.

Lynn Bartels of the Denver paper reported that a law temporarily requiring mail ballots to be sent to all voters was in place for the last election cycle but was not reauthorized. During debate over this law back in 2008, we understand that proponents suggested Colorado’s policy regarding “inactive” voters and mail ballots could violate the federal Voting Rights Act. Politically, if the situation comes to a head we suspect that the voting public will prefer to receive mail ballots automatically–even if they happen to miss one election.

But there’s something bigger needing acknowledgement: it’s becoming increasingly obvious that Secretary of State Gessler simply doesn’t prioritize access to the ballot. Indeed, Gessler has emerged as actively hostile to the goal of facilitating convenient access to the franchise by eligible voters. If that’s not what we want for the next three years, the Colorado legislature must do what it can, as quickly as it can, to close as many loopholes and ambiguities in election law as possible before Gessler finds a way to use them against lawful Colorado voters.

If this state of affairs disgusts you, that’s even more proof: elections matter.