The Progressive


A project of Common Dreams

For Immediate Release

Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167

Voter Challenges: The Montana Example


The Great Falls Tribune of Montana reports
that "the Montana Republican Party ... challenged the eligibility of
6,000 registered voters in six counties that historically are
Democratic strongholds."

James is an attorney for the voting rights organization Project Vote
and author of the 2007 report "Caging Democracy: A 50-Year History of
Partisan Challenges to Minority Voters." She said today: "Under state
and federal laws a person does not lose the right to vote simply
because he or she has moved. A Montana citizen can update his or her
registration at any time up to and including Election Day, and federal
law has clear procedures that must be followed when a change of address
form is filed with the United States Postal Office. Private, partisan
interference in this lawful process does a disservice to Montana, and
to overburdened election officials who work hard to see that all
eligible citizens get to vote."

James added: "These baseless challenges are just the latest in a long
series of voter caging operations designed to intimidate voters and
winnow voting lists to the challengers' liking. Like the recently
reported attempts to challenge voters in Michigan who appear on
foreclosure listings, like the massive challenges of voters that
occurred in Ohio in 2004, this latest assault on eligible voters is
disguised as a protection against the partisan myth of ineligible
voters trying to cast ballots. In reality, voter fraud by individuals
is incredibly rare, and the mass challenge plan simply represents a
cynical partisan attempt to intimidate eligible Montana residents -- a
disproportionate number of whom will be low-income citizens,
minorities, and residents under 30, all of whom are more likely to move
more often."

James concluded: "In light of the state and federal protections,
challenging every voter who has done nothing but file a change of
address with the U.S. Post Office would serve no purpose other than to
interfere with the orderly conduct of the election and intimidate those
voters who are not aware of their legal options under the laws of
Montana and the United States. Election officials, not partisan
operatives, should decide who is eligible to cast a ballot. ...
According to U.S. Census data, more than 16 percent of all Americans --
largely low-income, minority and young people -- changed their
residence in 2006. By current estimates, 16 percent of the eligible
voting population represents as many as 32 million Americans
nationwide. These Americans do not leave their votes behind when they

Background: In this case, the registrations of all voters in these
counties who submitted a change-of-address card with the Post Office
were challenged. Voters whose registrations were challenged include
Army 1st Lt. Kevin Furey, who had directed his mail to his parents'
house while he was deployed in Iraq. Also challenged was Frank St.
Pierre, an 86-year old 10-time Medal of Honor winner who helped save
thousands of allied troops at Dunkirk during the Second World War -- he
had moved across town recently.

Six thousand voters is twice the margin of the Montana Senate race in
2006. Two registered voters and the Montana Democratic Party have filed a federal lawsuit on Monday to stop the challenge. In an op-ed published last weekend, Montana's Lt. Governor John Bohlinger, a Republican, called the challenges "an utter disgrace."

According to the Great Falls Tribune, there has been no
history of voter fraud in Montana. The paper reports that "in 2007, the
Legislative Audit Division completed a wide-ranging audit that checked
for evidence of deceased individuals voting, incarcerated felons voting
or duplicate voting in the 2006 election and found none."

Forward Montana, a Montana-based nonprofit, has set up a web page helping affected voters.

A nationwide consortium, the Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA) represents an unprecedented effort to bring other voices to the mass-media table often dominated by a few major think tanks. IPA works to broaden public discourse in mainstream media, while building communication with alternative media outlets and grassroots activists.