WASHINGTON (AP) – House Democrats passed broad voting and ethics legislation on unanimous Republican opposition, leading to the Senate what would be the biggest overhaul of US electoral law in at least a generation.
House Resolution 1, which addresses virtually every aspect of the electoral process, was passed Wednesday night with a 220-210 vote almost in the party. This would restrict party gerrymandering electoral districts, remove obstacles to voting and bring transparency to an obscure campaign financing system that allows wealthy donors to anonymously fund political causes.
The bill is a powerful counterweight to the restrictions on voting rights that advance in Republican-controlled parliaments across the country in the wake of Donald Trump’s repeated false claims of a stolen 2020 election. Still, he faces an uncertain fate in the Democratic-controlled Senate, where he has little chance of passing without changes to the procedural rules that currently allow Republicans to block him.
The stakes in the result are monumental, reducing the fundamental idea that a person is equivalent to one vote and carrying with it the potential to shape the results of elections in the coming years. It also offers a test of how tough President Joe Biden and his party are willing to fight for their priorities, as well as those of their constituents.
This bill “will end the suppression of voters that we are seeing in debate now,” said Congresswoman Nikema Williams, a new congresswoman who represents the district of Georgia that the late voting rights champion John Lewis has held for years. “This bill is the ‘Good Problem’ that he has fought for his entire life.”
For Republicans, however, it would license unwanted federal interference in the authority of states to conduct their own elections – ultimately benefiting Democrats through greater participation, especially among minorities.
“Democrats want to use their minimal majority to pass bills to gain voter confidence, but to make sure they don’t lose any more seats in the next election,” said minority leader in the House, Kevin McCarthy, on Tuesday.
The move has been a priority for Democrats since they won a majority in the House in 2018. But it has acquired additional urgency in the wake of Trump’s false claims, which sparked the deadly invasion of the US Capitol in January.
Courts and even Trump’s last attorney general, William Barr, dismissed his allegations about the election as without merit. But, spurred on by these lies, state lawmakers across the United States filed more than 200 bills in 43 states that would limit access to ballots, according to a count by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.
In Iowa, the legislature voted to cut early voting in person and absent, at the same time, it prevents local electoral authorities from creating additional venues to facilitate early voting. In Georgia, the House on Monday voted legislation requiring identification to vote by mail it would also allow counties to cancel the vote in person on Sundays, when many black voters cast votes after the church.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court appeared ready to maintain voting restrictions in Arizona, which could make it more difficult to challenge state electoral laws in the future.
When asked why proponents sought to support Arizona laws, which limit who can deliver absent ballots and allow ballots to be rejected if they are dropped in the wrong constituency, a lawyer for the state’s Republican Party was surprisingly clear.
“Because it puts us at a competitive disadvantage compared to Democrats,” said attorney Michael Carvin. “Politics is a zero-sum game.”
The battle lines are quickly being drawn by outside groups that plan to spend millions of dollars on advertising and outreach campaigns.
Republicans “are not even being shy about it. They are saying the ‘quiet parts’ out loud, ”said Tiffany Muller, president of End Citizens United, a left-wing group that aims to reduce the influence of corporate money on politics. His organization launched a $ 10 million effort in support of the bill. “For them, it is not about protecting our democracy or protecting our elections. It is pure political party gain ”.
Meanwhile, conservatives are mobilizing a $ 5 million pressure campaign, asking moderate Senate Democrats to oppose the rule changes needed to approve the measure.
“HR 1’s goal is not to make elections better,” said Ken Cuccinelli, a former Trump administration Homeland Security official who is leading the effort. “It’s about the opposite. It aims to dirty the elections. “
So, what’s really in the account?
HR 1 would require states to automatically register qualified voters, in addition to offering registration on the same day. This would limit the ability of states to remove registered voters from their lists and restore the voting rights of former criminals. Among dozens of other provisions, it would also require states to offer 15 days of early voting and allow voting without justification.
On the verge of a single redesign in a decade of the limits of the congressional district, typically a fiercely partisan affair, the bill would mandate non-partisan commissions to handle the process rather than state legislatures.
Many Republican opponents in Congress focused on more restricted aspects, such as the creation of a public funding system for Congressional campaigns that would be financed through fines and liquidation resources raised from corporate wrongdoers.
They also attacked an effort to renew the federal government’s toothless electoral police. That agency, the Federal Election Commission, has been dominated by a party standoff for years, allowing campaign finance law violators to be left virtually unchecked.
Another section that has been the focus of Republican ire would force donor disclosure to “dark money” political groups, which are a magnet for wealthy interests that seek to influence the political process while remaining anonymous.
Still, the biggest obstacles lie ahead in the Senate, which is split 50/50 between Republicans and Democrats.
In some legislations, it only takes 51 votes to pass, with Vice President Kamala Harris as the tiebreaker. In a deeply controversial bill like this, they would need 60 votes under Senate rules to overcome Republican obstruction – a number that is unlikely to arrive.
Some Democrats discussed options such as lowering the limit to break an obstruction, or creating an alternative solution that would allow priority legislation, including a separate John Lewis voting plan, to be exempt. Biden has been legal to obstruct the reforms and Democratic Congressional advisers say the talks are fluid, but ongoing.
Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer did not commit to a deadline, but promised “to find the best way to get big, bold shares on multiple fronts.”
He said: “We will not be the legislative cemetery. … People will be forced to vote for them, yes or no, on a number of very important and serious issues. “
___
AP Congressional correspondent Lisa Mascaro contributed to this report.