It’s an election year.
An important one.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around that one, too.
But it’s certainly not too early to think about precisely how we can engage in the civic participation/Get-Out-the-Vote/voter empowerment process, as nonprofit service providers.
So, in case you missed it, here’s a really inspiring report from Nonprofit Vote, with case studies about what different nonprofits did to increase voter participation, and what lessons they learned in the process.
A few highlights, just to tide you over until you get through the 73 pages:
- Don’t forget to register your staff. Really. Don’t forget that.
- If you want people to register to vote, ask them. Individually. Posters are not an invitation. Asking people if you can register them is an invitation. And it makes a difference.
- You can register people beyond your walls, and getting out to register voters also means building your name recognition and community presence, too.
- Figure out what you want to measure, and then measure it. Do you care most about the total number of registrants? Voter turnout among those you register? Increasing participation among a specific population? Set goals and then hold yourself accountable.
- Invest in staff training. Now. Voter engagement doesn’t necessarily come naturally to nonprofit staff, so staff development is essential.
- Get people to pledge to vote–if they’re already registered, if laws prevent you from registering them, if you just registered them and you want to make sure they vote. Of course it’s no guarantee, but it gets you their contact information, and it gets them to acknowledge–at least briefly–that it matters if they show up. Both are huge.
- Use peer pressure, like in group sessions where the interest of just a few can prompt broad voter engagement.
- Partner. Remember that you don’t need to know/do everything, and you absolutely can rely on your field to carry some of the weight here. There are organizations that specialize in civil rights law, and they can help you with complicated questions/concerns about voting eligibility and restrictions.
- Don’t assume that clients will view electoral engagement as a ‘distraction’–some organizations found that there was tremendous interest in talking about the election and issues and their rights as voters. You may find yourselves having to bracket this work so that it doesn’t spill over into other programs, instead of it being seen as an intrusion.
I’d love to hear others’ reactions to these case studies, or, especially, your own lessons learned from your organization’s civic engagement work. What do we need to be doing in February to ensure that our clients’ voices are heard in August and November? What capacity and support do you need now to make that happen?
What will you do to make sure that we keep answering, “yes!” to the question: Can Nonprofits Increase Voting?
The What: We Still Need Voting Rights
More ‘whats’, in policy change.
Or, in this case, policy not-change.
Because, let’s be real:
We still need The Voting Rights Act.
We’re in the era of evidence-based policymaking, right?
Has there ever been a more successful piece of civil rights legislation in the history of the U.S.? No, really?
And so the idea that its very effectiveness is reason to scrap it is not just offensive (and it is; I am fairly chilled by hearing an Alabama official refer to ‘state sovereignty’ as reason to oppose a federal civil rights law). It’s dangerous.
I’m all for the role of the courts in policymaking (more on that tomorrow).
I just think that the U.S. Supreme Court should rule that the Voting Rights Act stands.
I’m glad that there’s a tremendous amount of advocacy going on, even while the Court deliberates.
If you haven’t already checked out these compelling videos showing how VRA provisions in various affected states are making a difference in how people can exercise their civic rights, check them out.
Look at this really great (although, again, disturbing) infographic on why we still need the Voting Rights Act.
You can’t call Antonin Scalia to point out that, Mr. Justice Sir, the right to vote is not a “racial entitlement”, because, um, voting isn’t an entitlement. That’s why it’s called the Voting Rights Act (He, of course, took objection to that, too, supposedly because it makes the legislation too popular for members of Congress to vote against? Como on, two members of the Kansas congressional delegation voted against the Violence Against Women Act, for crying out loud. These people are not afraid of catchy names.)
But you can tell everyone who will listen (friends, family, neighbors, the guy waiting at the post office) that, yes, we still need the VRA. We still need voting rights, in this age of photo identification and proof of citizenship and long lines at fewer polling places.
People bled for the right to vote in Alabama. That history leaves scars, not just on individual psyches but on institutions and ways of doing business.
That is why we need the Voting Rights Act.
Still.
Share this:
Like this:
Leave a comment
Posted in Analysis and Commentary
Tagged history, judicial policy, voting rights