The new Democratic majority in the U.S. House of Representatives has agreed voting rights should top the chamber’s legislative wish list. This week, Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell assailed House Bill 1, labeling the reform package a "partisan power grab" that robs states of their proper oversight role.
H.R. 1, dubbed the For the People Act, is a grab-bag of sorts – lending a federal boost to some state-endorsed initiatives like early voting and automatic voter restoration, while taking aim at presidential candidate tax returns and donor disclosure by super PACs. Its most headline-ready idea: Make election day a federal holiday.
Thursday, the Senate’s top Republican tore into the proposal, recasting the reforms as an unprecedented federal overreach aimed at weakening state oversight of elections.
"There is no objective basis for the sweeping federal takeover of elections that House Democrats have dreamed up," the veteran senator said. "No emergency. It's just a Washington power grab, for it's very own sake."
McConnell cited growing voter participation stats and Pew Research surveys indicating voters are mostly satisfied with the status quo.
"2016 saw the most ballots ever cast in a presidential election in American history. Now, with population growth, that isn’t entirely surprising — but the turnout rate was the 3rd-highest since 1968. The 2018 midterms? The highest midterm turnout in fifty years," the GOP leader argued.
In other words, where's the fire?
For an answer, a University of Kentucky election law expert is recommending the majority leader sit in on his class.
"He's welcome to come any time he's available," says Prof. Joshua Douglas, the author behind a CNN op-ed entitled "What's Mitch McConnell so afraid of?"
There, he says the GOP lawmaker would hear how state-tested proposals, like same-day registration, felon reenfranchisment, and others, have proven effective in regions red and blue.
"These reforms work in lots of places all over the country to improve voter turnout, make voting easier and more convenient, and bring more people into the political process," he argues. "And I can't see a reasonable justification against that."
One justification stressed by McConnell relates to the Constitution, more specifically the powers it grants states. In the senator's view, the decisions left to the laboratories of democracy just "melt away" under H.B. 1.
"What if states and localities want to make sure that ineligible voters under the age of 18 don’t end up on the voter rolls? Or decide whether or how convicted felons have their voting rights restored? Under the Democrat Politician Protection Act, states have no choice in the matter," McConnell told colleagues.
Douglas says that objection ignores other language in the document.
"The U.S. Constitution says that the times, places, and manner of regulating elections shall be with the states, but Congress may alter or amend those regulations," the professor adds. "This is perfectly consistent with our constitutional structure."
For now, the debate is just that – a debate. The Democratic proposal may be more performative than politically realistic, given the makeup of the Senate and the occupant of the Oval Office. But Douglas says it's a conversation worth having because it shows "what's possible when we have leaders and legislators who are focused on the voters and are not afraid of more people voting."
