‘The Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act’

There’s a certain temptation to forget about an election cycle once it’s over, and begin to focus attention on the immediate future. That’s particularly true when your side wins — whatever the other side was up to doesn’t matter as much, because they lost.

But looking back at some of the GOP’s tactics in the weeks immediately preceding Nov. 7, the unethical and blatantly dishonest schemes, successful or not, still leave a bitter taste. What’s more, because the media largely ignored nearly all of the most underhanded of the Republicans’ machinations, we’re poised to see the tactics refined, “perfected,” and brought back two years from now. That’s pretty much how the GOP operates — if there’s no political cost, keep it up.

That is, unless laws are rewritten to prevent abuses such as the ones we saw this year.

Following allegations of automated phone calls and targeted mail discouraging minorities from voting in the run-up to the 2006 midterms, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) proposed legislation that would impose harsh penalties on violators Thursday.

“Too often, we hear reports of mysterious phone calls and mailers … that seek to mislead and threaten voters to keep them from the polls,” Obama said in a statement. “These deceptive and underhanded campaign tactics usually target voters living in minority or low-income neighborhoods.”

Obama’s bill, the Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act, would criminalize robo-calls and direct mail that mislead potential voters about the location or time of a federal election, voter eligibility or a candidate’s political party. Also made punishable by the bill would be any call that promotes, attacks, supports or opposes a clearly identifiable candidate and does not properly identify the call’s originator.

Obama’s bill would punish violators with up to one year in jail and a $100,000 fine.

Indeed, states are sick of these tactics, too.

Paul Kiel noted that the attorney general in Missouri has introduced legislation to ban automated political calls, and other states are following suit.

[Y]ou can add Virginia and Pennsylvania to the list, and likely Connecticut. In Virginia, state Delegate Bob Brink (D-Arlington) has announced that he will introduce legislation outlawing robo calls in the state.

In Pennsylvania, where a barrage of robo calls targeted Dem Lois Murhpy in the state’s 6th District, state Rep. Mike McGeehan, D-Phila., says that he will announce the introduction of a bill next week that would add political robo calls to those covered by the state’s “Do Not Call” Act.

And in Connecticut, where the state GOP sent out robo calls prior to the election promising to end robo calls, a number of legislators have been reported to be interested in an anti-robo call bill. […]

You can add Florida (the bill would add political calls to the state’s Do Not Call list) and Wisconsin (the bill would ban all automated calls) to the list.

In this sense, Republicans really had an impact this year, didn’t they?

We can only hope. However, it is imperative that focus continue to be aligned directly on this problem (hopefully, the suit in Florida will smash electronic voting in its current form, and, at a minimum, should help to keep the issue in the headlines). Time is pretty darn short between now and 2008 when it comes to things like wholesale replacement of voting standards. I have this nagging feeling (hope I am wrong) that, while some bill may eventually pass, the reality won’t change too much for too many places in ’08.

  • I am amazed that these types of dirty tricks aren’t covered under some broader election tampering statute. Guess not.

  • beep52- oftentimes, they are (see New Hampshire 2002 for details). Only problem is, plenty of lawyers are working overtime to hedge these things just enough to probably pass legal muster. Then, since it’s primarily a state-based thing, you have the problem of crossing state lines, and whose laws the calls are governed by… So, yes, a good, clean, and loop-hole free Federal law would go a long way towards cleaning up the mess.

  • A good start. I’d like to see some sort of Sarbanes-Oxley type agreement that requires candidates to sign off on and take repsonisiblity for any campaign work done on their behalf.
    How many times did we hear that the GOP ran a negative ad against the Dem. candidate and even if the GOP candidate complained, the RNC would refuse to pull the ad?
    I’m sure the GOP and the RNC had worked out this little dance well before hand, but if the ad couldn’t go out until the candidate expressly agreed, the dance would stop.

  • The hilarious part of these efforts is that the GOP—stalwart defender of “the right to trample the Constitution”—will now play the “free speech” card….

  • As Castor mentions, the realm of lawyers.

    We’re trying to regulate political speach here folks. Maybe the First Amendment should be limited to “real” human beings willing to stand up and give their names before their poison opinions. But are you sure you want those rules in place as the Bushites try to drag us into their Facist vision of America?

    Just remember the rule of unintended consequences. Ken Mehlman claimed that McCain/Feingold prevented him from pulling the “Call Me Harold” ad. Do we want more unaccountability in the political process?

  • Could there be an arguement presented that is related to the fact that these robo-calls often fill up one’s answering machine with endless messages? I must have had 5 commercials from lil’ Georgie, 2 from John Kyl, and another 6 from miscellaneous sources after I returned after several days away. Any important messages could have been lost. Isn’t this an appropriation of resources that the propigators haven’t paid for, rather like the fax debacle a decade or so ago?

  • I thought I had heard that Rahm Emmanuel was pursuing $500/call damages against the RNC for violating a law already on the books that said that a robocall had at the beginning to identify the sender. Is that still on the table? (And will it bankrupt the RNC?)

  • I believe the penalty for tampering with elections should be very severe. Tampering includes robocalling, misdirecting voters, voter intimidation, scrubbing of voter lists, uncounted ballots and any other efforts considered illegal that may alter one legitimate vote in an election. I suggest a minimum 10 year sentence without possibility of parole for a first offence and penalities increasing in 10 year increments for each subsequent offence. This would be required for all conspirators(e.g. not just the people manning the phones). Government election officials would be elegible for 30 years for the first offence. THe penaltieis have to be so tough, that potential offenders will not even think of risking entering a grey area of the law. Rewards of $100,000 per offender should be offered for information leading to the conviction of offenders.

    We have to stop this stuff cold!

  • Comments are closed.