Showing posts with label Vote. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vote. Show all posts

Thursday, August 27, 2020

Hundreds of Thousands of Nursing Home Residents May Not Be Able to Vote in November Because of the Pandemic

Sally Deng, special to ProPublica
Renowned inventor Walter Hutchins has voted in every presidential election since 1952. This year, as many states stopped sending teams to help seniors vote, his nursing home was on coronavirus lockdown and his streak was in jeopardy.

by Ryan McCarthy and Jack Gillum

Walter Hutchins cast his first vote for president for Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952, and he has voted in every election since. The last thing he wants is for his “68-year streak,” as he proudly calls it, to end in November.

An industrial engineer, Hutchins helped design the M16, the weapon of choice for American soldiers during the Vietnam War, and he invented several tools that may be currently sitting in your garage. He and his wife, Margaret, a teacher and ordained Episcopal minister whom he married the year after he voted for Ike, were “executive gypsies,” she said. They followed his jobs from Connecticut to Florida, New York and Wisconsin, until they retired to North Carolina. Wherever they were, they always voted — in fire stations, churches, their retirement community. When Walter became blind and hard of hearing, Margaret helped him in the voting booth.

This year, what stumped Hutchins, despite all his resourcefulness, was how he was going to exercise his basic constitutional right to vote during a pandemic. The Davis Community nursing home in Wilmington, North Carolina, where Hutchins has lived for two years, has barred visitors since March. Margaret, still in the retirement community nearby, can’t help him, nor can their four kids and eight grandchildren.

Neither can the nursing home staff. A 2013 state law prohibits staff at hospitals, clinics, nursing homes and rest homes from helping residents with their ballots. Some North Carolina counties, including New Hanover, where Wilmington is located, send teams into nursing homes to assist voters or bring them to polling places, but the threat of the coronavirus has limited that service as well.
As the pandemic worsened, he and Margaret began to consider a more drastic measure to keep his streak intact. “It makes me angry that something like this could happen and that we’d be denied the right to vote just because of our age and condition,” she said.



How to vote during a pandemic poses a dilemma for many Americans, who worry about the health risks of voting in person and whether the U.S. Postal Service will be able to deliver mail-in ballots on time. Such concerns are multiplied for nursing home residents.

Most, though not all, of the roughly 2.2 million Americans living in nursing homes or assisted living communities are elderly — and thus at higher risk of dying from the coronavirus. They’re also part of the most politically engaged demographic in the country. In 2018, 66% of Americans over 65 voted, compared with just 35% of those 18 to 29. In 2016, Donald Trump had an advantage over Hillary Clinton among voters 65 and older by 53% to 44%, according to the Pew Research Center.

At least 68,000 residents and staff of nursing homes and other long-term care facilities have died of COVID-19 since the pandemic outbreak began, some 41% of all coronavirus deaths in the U.S., according to a New York Times analysis. This ongoing crisis at care facilities across the country has had a troubling hidden effect: the looming mass disenfranchisement of America’s elderly and disabled. Hutchins is one of hundreds of thousands of residents of nursing homes and assisted living communities who may not be not able to vote this year because of coronavirus related-lockdowns and the failure of state and county officials to help a forgotten population of voters.
A family visits through a window at a locked-down nursing home in New York. (Stephen Speranza/The New Yor​k Times via Redux)
Family and friends who helped them vote in prior elections can’t visit them — and may have taken ill or died from COVID-19 themselves. Swing states such as Florida and Wisconsin have suspended efforts to send teams to nursing homes to assist with voting. Despite a federal law that residents must be “supported by the facility in the exercise of” their rights, two states — North Carolina and Louisiana — prohibit staff from actively doing so. While many other states allow voters to appoint a helper of their choice, voting assistance may be a low priority for understaffed institutions struggling with COVID-19 outbreaks. And polling places are being moved from nursing homes and assisted living facilities to sites less affected by the virus. For example, Somerville, Massachusetts, relocated voting from a nursing home to a school a little less than a mile away.

“The hurdles are so high for people that are living in long-term care facilities — people who don’t have access to or who need different levels of help,” said Lori Smetanka, executive director of the National Consumer Voice for Quality Long-Term Care, an advocacy group. “I really think disenfranchising that entire population — we’re in real danger of that at this point.”

Under federal law, nursing homes have a duty to facilitate residents’ rights, including voting, said Nina Kohn, a distinguished scholar in elder law at Yale University. But even before the pandemic, compliance was spotty. From 2018 through 2019, Medicare documented complaints from at least 55 U.S. nursing homes in which residents said they weren’t given the opportunity to vote or were unable to get help casting a ballot. But nursing home inspectors categorized the vast majority of these complaints as low severity, meaning they were seen as inflicting little or no actual harm.

As a result, fines for violating residents’ voting rights are rare. Nursing home inspectors, Kohn said, do not take such violations seriously. “What you have is a system where the deprivation of our fundamental civil liberties never arises as being classified as real harm,” she said. “You’ve got a whole category of violations where there are virtually no consequences.”

Some nursing homes have begun adjusting procedures ahead of Nov. 3. Chris Hannon, the chief operating officer of Pointe Group Care, a nursing home operator in Massachusetts, said his staff is working to ensure residents are mailed absentee ballots. Although he hasn’t seen problems, “it becomes as challenging of a job as any other responsibility that we have,” he said.



Many nursing home residents have some degree of mental impairment — nearly half of long-term care patients suffer from dementia or Alzheimer’s. But those afflictions do not mean residents automatically lose their right to vote — competency requirements vary from state to state — and advocates say that nursing home staff often make arbitrary judgments about who can vote. More egregiously, some residents are not informed of their voting rights.

Other residents are as mentally sharp as ever — yet still may not be able to vote this year. Jay Leavitt jokingly refers to himself as a “sort of a disaster case,” a phrase that wildly undersells his productivity. A former Fulbright scholar, with a doctorate in applied mathematics, Leavitt used to run the academic computing program at the University at Buffalo. He’s 84 and is a quadrapelgic, but he’s still publishing research; his current project examines how natural resource levels affected prehistoric migratory patterns.

“I’m sort of blessed. Even though I’m a quad, my mental activities haven’t decreased. As a matter of fact, they’re probably increasing,” Leavitt said.

He normally stays in a nursing home in Hendersonville, North Carolina. But this summer he was transferred to the River Falls Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center in Slater-Marietta, South Carolina, for treatment of a wound.

Over the years, he’s voted in person or by mail, and he has helped other nursing home residents fill out their ballots. He’s even grilled local candidates about conditions in North Carolina nursing homes. Because of his disability, he can’t mark a ballot himself. His wife used to help him. But she isn’t allowed to visit him, and she is in the early stages of dementia, he said.

He’s succeeded in getting a North Carolina absentee ballot form, but he’s not sure where to send it, or how to fulfill the requirement for a witness. The River Falls staff has not discussed voting with him or offered assistance to anyone he knows, he said.

“I’m certainly very concerned” about voting, Leavitt said. “I haven’t seen anything done in this nursing home.”

After ProPublica asked about Leavitt’s experience, a River Falls spokesperson said it would provide him with any voting help he needs. The facility held a cookout in early July to register residents to vote, the spokesperson said.

“We’ve made it a top priority to help our staff and residents get involved in the electoral process and exercise their right to vote,” River Falls administrator Tkeyah Brunson said. “Just as we have worked hard to help residents communicate remotely with friends and family, we want to help our residents enjoy their normal freedoms and quality of life during these difficult times, including the ability to participate in our democracy.”



Before the pandemic, recognizing the barriers that elderly and disabled voters in institutions already faced, almost half of states offered some form of assistance. Florida’s program was typical. A trained bipartisan team appointed by the election supervisor would travel to residential care facilities and help residents fill out absentee ballots. The service was provided to any facility that had at least five people interested in voting and submitted a request at least three weeks prior to an election.

This year, Florida’s program has been suspended, leaving thousands without help in a swing state with one of the largest elderly populations. A similar program in Wisconsin, where “special voting deputies” visited nursing homes, has also been curtailed.

Karen Lee Weidig, who served as a special voting deputy in Madison, Wisconsin, for more than a decade, said she was “stunned and disappointed” that the program is not being offered this year. “The people to whom we present ballots very much want to vote, it’s a big part of their civic life,” she said. “It might be the only part of their civic life.”
Nursing homes have shut their doors to visitors, and many states have curtailed programs that provided voting assistance. (Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images)
Some election officials in Wisconsin are trying to adjust the rules on the fly, according to internal emails obtained by ProPublica. “The assistant for the ballot cannot be an employee of the care facility,” stated part of a July presentation by Madison’s elections clerk. Soon after, an elections official indicated those rules had been relaxed following questions from a local nursing home: “Since the ballot is being mailed and SVDs are not present, the voter can designate ANYONE to help them mark their ballot (including facility staff and administrators).”

In North Carolina, individual counties decide whether to send what are known as multipartisan assistance teams (MATs). They have traditionally been funded by county resources and depend on volunteers. On Aug. 1, the state Department of Health and Human Services released guidance that “strongly encouraged” that those teams visit residents outdoors, no more than two residents at a time, and maintain 6 feet of social distance.

Officials in North Carolina counties that still plan to provide MATs told ProPublica that they will follow this guidance. But people familiar with the process said that the guidelines, though appropriate during the pandemic, will make it much harder. For one thing, not every voter is healthy enough to be outside. When North Carolina’s League of Women Voters ran an informal precursor to those teams, volunteers had to go room to room, sometimes waking residents from naps, said Vice President Marian Lewin.

Even in normal times, MATs leave voters out, Lewin said. “You’re doing this out of the good of your heart,” she said. “If the teams exist,” they may consist of five or 10 volunteers for an entire county. “By their very nature, they’re inadequate.”

Martha Roblee, 67, is a resident of the assisted living section of Scotia Village, a community care facility in Laurinburg, North Carolina. Through her work with the League of Women Voters, Roblee has been helping to educate voters at Scotia, but there are people she isn’t allowed to reach in the skilled nursing wing. “They’ve been voting for decades. Who’s going to help these people?” Roblee said.

One resident of an assisted living facility in southeastern North Carolina said she has helped other people there vote in prior elections. The woman, who suffers from a crippling genetic condition, said some of her “dearest friends” in the facility have died from COVID-19. Almost every day, she has a socially distanced lunch with her boyfriend of 15 years in the facility’s lobby, where they’re separated by tempered glass. “I have a rocking chair. He has a rocking chair,” said the woman, who requested anonymity. “He brings Big Macs and he gets on his cellphone. I get on my cellphone on speaker, and we just eat and jabber.”

Helping the elderly and disabled to vote will be very challenging in the pandemic, especially if MATs aren’t available, she said. “How would you do it?” she said. “How would you walk a senior citizen or a person with a disability through marking their legal ballot so that you knew the vote they wanted to cast was theirs? It would be a difficult thing. You would have to get into their chair and think like they do, and look at that ballot through their eyes.”

Even if state law were to allow it, she said, the staff don’t have time to help with voting. “They’re juggling all kinds of things trying to keep us from going crazy,” she said. “To put something else on them? No.” So far, she said, the facility has not even discussed voting: “We’re hard put to get our Pepsi machine filled.”

In June, to help relieve the boredom of life under a lockdown, Phoenix Assisted Care in Cary, North Carolina, posted residents’ pictures on Facebook. Each resident held a sign describing their interests and asking for pen pals from across the country. (“I like women, wrestling, eating out,” one man’s sign read.) Donna Horton, an administrator there, said that the response was “hogwild”; the posts went viral and were picked up by national news organizations. Since then, residents have received more than 110,000 letters and hundreds of packages.

But Phoenix hasn’t come up with a similar innovation to enable residents to vote. In past years, about 40 have voted, usually in person, Horton said. This year she isn’t sure what her facility will do, or if MATs will be enough.

“My fear is taking them somewhere that is going to expose them,” Horton said. “This is a senior population. It’s not gonna take but one person, and it’s gonna spread. I’ve been doing this for 20 years. This is really tough. No one is seeing their family, you can’t vote. It’s beyond something I ever thought I’d witness.”



This spring, a friend of Margaret Hutchins at the local League of Women Voters chapter asked her if Walter would be interested in joining a lawsuit challenging North Carolina’s vote by mail restrictions and ballot accessibility laws. “I thought that he’d be willing, and that I better call him and ask him,” Margaret said.

Hutchins agreed. He signed up as a plaintiff, along with the league; Democracy North Carolina, a nonpartisan nonprofit; and several voters who were either elderly, disabled or at high risk of contracting COVID-19. Hutchins was the only plaintiff confined to a nursing home.

Walter and Margaret’s son, Jim Hutchins, 54, a correctional officer in Idaho, said he wasn’t surprised that his dad got involved in the case. Walter was “always very active in exercising his rights,” Jim said. “Dad was a lifelong Republican. Mom was a Democrat, so they always canceled each other out.” Today, Walter and Margaret are registered Independents; they declined to say whom they would support in November.

In the suit, Hutchins’ lawyers argued that the state was violating his rights by barring staff from helping him with his ballot. The case also sought broader changes to make voting easier in North Carolina.

Conservative legal groups intervened to oppose the lawsuit. Committees for the Republican Senatorial and Congressional campaigns filed motions in the case, arguing that election rules, including the staff prohibition, should not be changed. The Public Interest Legal Foundation, a right-wing think tank that has long pushed exaggerated claims of voter fraud, filed an amicus brief for the defense, asking the court to consider its research on inaccuracies in the state’s voter rolls.

The state and county boards contended that Hutchins had not yet been deprived of the right to vote. His facility, for example, might not be locked down by the election. They also argued that MATs could help Hutchins with his ballot, though the state had not yet released its guidance.

Emails submitted as evidence in the case, though, showed that Hutchins and other nursing home residents might not be able to rely on MAT, and that at least two counties did not have teams. “It may be difficult to find a team of bipartisan volunteers to serve, and the MAT program has no funding allocated to it by the legislature,” Katelyn Love, the North Carolina Board of Elections’ general counsel, had written to a disability rights group. “If a MAT team is unavailable, another person may assist a voter in a nursing home or other facility provided that the person is not disqualified. Nursing home owners, managers, and employees, may not assist.”

Hilary Harris Klein, a lawyer for Hutchins at the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, told ProPublica that the law prohibiting employee assistance trampled Hutchins’ rights. “He trusts these people and wants them to help,” she said. “The government is denying his choice by enforcing this ban on staff assistance.”

In August, a federal judge in Greensboro, North Carolina, found that the state had violated Hutchins’ rights, but only his. Staff at Davis Community could help Hutchins with his ballot, but no one else there or in the rest of the state could receive assistance from nursing home workers.

Which is to say, Walter Hutchins won a remarkable legal victory that was also remarkably limited.

The North Carolina Board of Elections declined to comment on the lawsuit. But Patrick Gannon, a public information officer for the board, said that in March the board “recommended that the prohibition on facility employees be temporarily lifted during the pandemic.” North Carolina’s Republican-dominated legislature declined to lift the ban.

Gannon also said that this summer, for the first time, state funding had been allocated to help recruit and train MAT teams. In a March letter to the governor and state legislators, Karen Brinson Bell, the board’s executive director, noted that MAT teams may not be able to reach some facilities.

Davis Community did not respond to multiple requests for comment, including how it will help Hutchins vote in his 18th consecutive presidential election.

Klein said she was disappointed by the narrow ruling. “The court acknowledges that a lot of people are in this situation. So we would have hoped that it would have applied to more people, but that doesn’t mean the state can’t do anything about this.” Calling the judge’s decision “clearly erroneous” and arguing that it will lead to “manifest injustice,” Hutchins’ lawyers filed a motion this month asking the court to let all North Carolina nursing home residents who need assistance with their ballots get help from facility staff.

For Walter, the decision was a welcome, if limited, victory. “I’m a very patriotic guy,” he said in an email. “I love this country. And the right to vote is a very important thing to me. I’m very, very pleased to have participated in this lawsuit. But there are others who are in nursing homes in North Carolina who need help in voting too. They should be able to have nursing staff help them as well.”

Full Article & Source:
Hundreds of Thousands of Nursing Home Residents May Not Be Able to Vote in November Because of the Pandemic

Saturday, June 4, 2016

Generations who fought before us deserve justice, protection


Commentary  by Karen C. Buck
Imagine a world without the elders of our country — those who fought racism and discrimination in the civil rights, voting rights, and women's rights movements; those who fought bravely on foreign shores, in WWII against Nazi brutality and on other harrowing grounds; and those who blazed trails for all of us. Strong women and men who through the last half-century have helped raise their voices for justice, for equality, and for their communities, who helped enrich our city and our world at large.

In July 1965 in Washington, D.C., President Lyndon B. Johnson envisioned a nation that "no longer will ... refuse the hand of justice to those who have given a lifetime of service and wisdom and labor to the progress of this progressive country." As a result of his eloquence and advocacy, the federal Older Americans Act was passed, perhaps the most important piece of aging legislation in our lifetimes.

President Obama signed its reauthorization in April, after years of no reauthorization by Congress. Essential life-saving services for older Americans, our parents and grandparents, our senior veterans, those who have been instrumental in the defining events of modern American history and law, were seemingly not a priority.

Seeking justice for older Americans, as our country faces what has been deemed an "aging tsunami," is today a dynamic area of law, often called "elder justice." Congress passed the Elder Justice Act with broad bipartisan support to recognize that elder abuse is a national crisis. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has made access to justice for older Pennsylvanians a priority with the groundbreaking Office of Elder Justice in the Courts, and the Advisory Council on Elder Justice.

Judicial leaders in Philadelphia are strategizing on how to create an Elder Court and/or court-based Elder Justice Resource Center. Great progress and leadership. Yet the challenges continue for seniors in our country: poverty, homelessness, abuse, exploitation. And most seniors deal not with death and end of life, but with all of the complexities of modern life.

Currently, Pennsylvania is the fourth "oldest" state in the nation, with 2.8 million individuals aged 60 and older — 20 percent of the state population. By the year 2030, it is estimated that 3.6 million Pennsylvanians will be aged 60 and older. More than a quarter of grandparents over the age of 60 are primarily responsible for their grandchildren under the age of 18. Seniors serve and enrich their communities, families, and country at all ages and in all economic, racial, and linguistic sectors. They are cherished mentors, advocates, caregivers, volunteers, leaders.

We as public-interest attorneys and advocates provide free services to those in need in complex and daunting areas which affect real people's lives, their safety, security, and survival. SeniorLAW Center celebrates 38 years of pursuing elder justice, and proudly recognizes those who came before us.

At its annual gala earlier this month, SeniorLAW Center recognized remarkable older Americans and advocates for justice. We honored older women who broke glass ceilings in the law and the judiciary; who fought sexual harassment before it was recognized as an actionable and despicable act; who advocated for diversity in our profession and posthumously fought for admission of a grandfather into the Pennsylvania Bar decades after he was denied on grounds of being black; older artists who used their tools of film and photography to tell the stories of poverty and access to justice; those who created programs for the elderly and poor in our most struggling neighborhoods; and all who continue to fight for what is right and good and just.

Today, hundreds of thousands of seniors face their elder years in poverty or are targeted for exploitation, abuse, fraud, disenfranchisement and homelessness as they enter the "third age" and last chapters of their lives. At least 1 in 10 older Americans will be a victim of abuse over their lifetime.

According to research funded by the National Institute of Justice, almost 11 percent of people age 60 and older, or 5.7 million individuals, suffered from some form of abuse in 2009 alone. Elder abuse includes physical, emotional and sexual abuse, self-neglect, and shocking and sometimes highly sophisticated forms of financial exploitation.

Elder abuse is deadly: Victims of elder abuse, neglect, and financial exploitation have three times the risk of dying prematurely. Elder abuse is devastating: Financial exploitation costs older Americans at least $3 billion nationally, as estimated by the MetLife Mature Market Institute and the National Committee for the Prevention of Elder Abuse. Abuse of power of attorney or guardianship, fraudulent deed conveyances, home repair contractor fraud, credit card and bank account fraud, and unauthorized use, pressured sales of unsuitable products, lottery scams, and illegal and exploitative telemarketing and collection practices are just examples of the many forms of elder financial exploitation. And elder abuse is the only form of family violence for which the federal government has historically provided virtually no funding.

Philadelphia is home to one of the largest populations of senior citizens in the country — and one of the poorest. One in five of our seniors lives in poverty. Most are women. Last year, SeniorLAW Center assisted over 5,000 clients throughout Pennsylvania ranging in age from 60 to 101, and as diverse as our nation, of all colors, races, languages, and orientations. We are the only such organization in Pennsylvania and one of few in the nation focusing the power of the law to help elders live their best lives.

I recently returned from a two-month sabbatical in Iceland, Japan, New Zealand, and Australia, meeting with leaders in government, the law, and aging to share and glean best practices in elder justice. There is much we can learn from the world, and they from us. Aging is a universal truth: If we live, we will age. Our elders represent where we've come from, our ancestors, and where we are going, our future. Join us as we strive to ensure that elder justice becomes not just a new term of art, but a reality, for the elders of today and for generations to come.

Full Article & Source:
Generations who fought before us deserve justice, protection

Thursday, April 14, 2016

9 Investigates: Guardianship appointments cost Florida seniors the right to vote


SEMINOLE COUNTY, Fla. — In December, Seminole County Resident Miriam Lancaster turned 100 years old.

In March, she went to vote in the Florida Primary and was turned away.

There are more than 3,000 seniors in Florida who have what is known as a “plenary guardian," a guardian appointed by the courts to handle all of the senior’s matters.

Plenary guardians are usually appointed in cases where the senior’s family is either unable or unwilling to oversee day-to-day issues such as bills and living arrangements.

When such a guardian is appointed in Florida, the seniors lose their ability to vote.

“Nothing has changed about me, I still feel the same way I did about the same things,” Lancaster said. “I may be a little slower, but I am not mentally incapacitated.”

Nine Investigates discovered not every state automatically removes the voting rights when a guardian is appointed. According to the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, laws vary wildly from state-to-state.

In Alaska, “an incapacitated person for whom a guardian has been appointed is not presumed to be incompetent and retains all legal and civil rights,” according to the Bazelon Center.

Meanwhile, 24 other states, including Utah and Texas, have no specific laws regarding revocation of voting rights by a person assigned a guardian.

“I just can’t believe they’ve taken away her rights,” said Sally Baptiste, Lancaster's friend.

Florida also uses another form of guardianship, known as a “limited guardian”. Under a limited guardianship, a judge would determine which rights are to retained by the senior.

“I want my voice to mean something,” Lancaster said.

She plans to petition the court to regain her voting rights, a process which will take time and money.

Lancaster will likely also have to undergo mental competency hearing to attempt to regain her rights.

Full Article & Source:
9 Investigates: Guardianship appointments cost Florida seniors the right to vote

Monday, July 21, 2014

Los Angeles Superior Court Accused of Violating Voters' (Under Guardianship) Rights

Los Angeles Superior Court unlawfully strips voting rights from thousands of disabled Americans who are under adult guardianship, an advocacy group claims in a complaint to the Department of Justice.

The Disability and Abuse Project of Spectrum Institute, "as next friend of limited conservatees under the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles Superior Court," sent a formal complaint against Los Angeles Superior Court on Thursday to the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division.

Project director Dr. Nora Baladerian said in a statement: "Being told that you are less than other Americans and that you cannot exercise your right to vote has a detrimental emotional and psychological effect on people with disabilities. We trust that Attorney General Eric Holder will take action to protect the rights of these deserving American citizens."

 According to the 8-page complaint, thousands of people with developmental or intellectual disabilities lose their right to vote after parents petition probate court to allow them to make legal, financial and medical decisions for their adult children.

The advocacy group claims the violations stem in part from court conservatorship workshops, in which parents are prompted to check off a box confirming their adult child is unable to complete an affidavit of voter registration.

Judges rely on that stroke of a pen to find that conservatees are disqualified from voting, according to the complaint.

Disqualifying adults with developmental disabilities in this way violates the Voting Rights Act of 1965, because the court is using a literacy test to make a determination, and court-appointed attorneys disregard federal laws that allow parents to assist their adult children in filling out voter registration forms, according to the complaint.

The project's legal director Thomas Coleman said there was no mention of the Voting Rights Act when he attended a seminar for Probate Volunteer Panel attorneys hosted by the Superior Court and the Los Angeles County Bar Association.

"The attorneys were told by a judge that proposed limited conservatees will lose their voting rights if they are unable to complete a voter registration form on their own accord. The judge did not mention disability accommodation laws. He specifically stated that a mother could not help her son by filling out the registration form for him," Coleman wrote in the complaint.

 Roughly 1,200 new limited conservatorship petitions go through the court every year. Most parents who file do not have a private lawyer to guide them through the process and rely on the court's self-help clinics, in addition to court-appointed attorneys.

Full Article and Source:
Courthouse News:  LA Court Accused of Violating Voting Rights

Friday, May 31, 2013

Former KY Attorney, Donald A. "Champ" Maze, Disbarred Over Vote Buying

A former county attorney from northeast Kentucky was disbarred Thursday for paying voters to cast ballots for him in a 2006 election and then lying about it to a grand jury.
 
The Kentucky Supreme Court found that one-time Bath County Attorney Donald A. "Champ" Maze's conduct proved so egregious, he should be permanently banned from practicing law, even though he had no prior disciplinary record.
 
Chief Justice John D. Minton, writing for the court's majority, said Maze abused a position of power and trust by using his office to corrupt both the voting process and the judicial system.
 
"Any layperson should know better, and so much more should a lawyer with over 20 years of experience, 12 of which included prosecuting criminals as the County Attorney," Minton wrote.

Full Article and Story:
Former County Attorney Disbarred Over Vote Buying

Sunday, March 17, 2013

Denying suffrage to wards said ‘excessive’


Even though Japan’s adult guardianship system may be necessary to protect the assets of those who need additional attention due to their mental state, stripping them of their suffrage is an excessive infringement of rights that goes against international trends, experts said.

Thursday’s ruling that the Public Office Election Law takes away the voting rights of the disabled and the elderly with dementia is “unconstitutional” cast the spotlight on the fact Japan lags behind the global community in protecting the rights of those with certain disabilities.

The guardianship scheme was first introduced in 2000 to help people with cognitive disabilities manage their assets. It replaced a system dating from the Meiji Era that prevented those declared incompetent from having control over their own property and was often criticized as discriminatory because details of their disability was officially entered into the family registry.

Makoto Arai, a professor at Chuo University and president of the Japan Adult Guardianship Law Association, welcomed the ruling, but at the same time criticized the current system for being “behind the times.”

“Times have changed since the Meiji Era, when the old system was established, and (the adult guardianship system) was created with a new principle to respect the elderly and the disabled (to allow them) to make decisions by themselves and to create a society in which they can live normal lives,” Arai said.

Full Article & Source:
Denying suffrage to wards said ‘excessive’

Thursday, March 14, 2013

Wards demand right to vote / Adult guardianship system's denial of privilege incites legal battles

The Yomiuri Shimbun Is it unconstitutional to take away the voting rights of adults who are placed under guardianship due to a disability or dementia?

The Public Offices Election Law stipulates that when an adult is placed under guardianship, he or she loses the right to vote. The first judicial ruling on this regulation will be handed down Thursday at the Tokyo District Court.

Is it legal for the adult guardianship system, which is supposed to protect the rights of the handicapped, to deprive the individuals subject to the system of their voting rights? Lawsuits similar to Thursday's case are currently under way at three other district courts.

"I want to vote again with my father and mother," said 50-year-old Takumi Nagoya from Ushiku, Ibaraki Prefecture, on Jan. 24. She clearly voiced her opinion in the No. 103 courtroom at the Tokyo District Court when presiding Judge Makoto Jyozuka asked her to speak at the close of a 1-1/2-year-long lawsuit.

According to her father, Seikichi, 81, although Takumi suffers from Down syndrome and has a moderate intellectual impairment, she can read simple kanji and has a job labeling sundry goods. Since turning 20, she has always read official election newsletters and had gone to vote. When an official at the voting station thanked her for taking the trouble, Takumi looked proud, her father said.

Seikichi decided to use the adult guardian system because he was worried about property management for Takumi, and was appointed in February 2007 as her guardian by a family court. Since then, Takumi has not been able to vote.

Seikichi has apologized to her, saying he meant to protect her rights but in the end her rights were taken away. "It's OK," Takumi reportedly said to him.

The guardian system started in 2000 to replace the former incompetency system, with the aim of supporting people who do not have adequate capacities to make judgments due to a disability or dementia. There are three types of arrangements according to a person's abilities: guardianship, curatorship and assistance. Only the guardianship category effectively requires wards to abdicate their right to vote. About 136,000 people had guardians as of the end of 2012.

Full Article & Source:
Wards demand right to vote / Adult guardianship system's denial of privilege incites legal battles

Thursday, November 1, 2012

Linda Kincaid Advocates for Conservatee's Right to Vote

NASGA's California Advocacy Liaison, Linda Kincaid, makes her eighth appearance in front of the Santa County County Board of Supervisors to advocate on behalf of Gisela Riordan and other conservatees under the control of the Santa Clara County Public Guardian. Source: YouTube:NASGA's Advocacy Liaison, Linda Kincaid, on Gisela Riordan & the Santa Clara County Public Guardian

Sunday, October 28, 2012

Keeping the 'Mentally Incompetent' From Voting

Roberta Blomster, 37, lives in a suburb with her parents and sister outside of St. Paul, MN, where she interns with Congressman Keith Ellison's campaign and testifies at her state capital on behalf of people with disabilities. During her free time she knits and spends time with her family and their two dogs.

Doctors have diagnosed her with mild mental retardation and epilepsy, and she is under limited guardianship, meaning that her mother manages her health and financial decisions.

The decision about whether to vote, however, is hers alone -- a reality that might be different if she lived in another state. She gets her news from the local paper, television and social media. "It feels wonderful knowing that I'm able to make informed decisions about who I'm voting for," she says. "It's a very satisfying feeling knowing that you're making a difference."

Full Article and Source:
Keeping the 'Mentally Incompetent' From Voting

Saturday, October 6, 2012

Judge says Minnesota man with guardian can vote

A Hennepin County judge on Thursday ruled that a man under guardianship may vote, saying the Minnesota Constitution's removal of voting rights from people with guardians violates the U.S. Constitution.

Judge Jay Quam's order is a victory for Brian W. Erickson, who suffers from schizophrenia and is under guardianship but remains high-functioning. It's the second court ruling in the past two months that affirms voting rights among people who have court-appointed decision-makers.

An attorney for Erickson's guardian this year challenged Article VII of the state Constitution that bans a number of classes of people from voting, including those "under guardianship." That article contradicts language in state statutes that guarantees wards' right to vote unless it's taken away by a judge.

An estimated 22,000 Minnesotans have guardians because of advanced dementia, mental illness and other disabilities. In a 26-page order, Quam ruled that the language in the Minnesota Constitution is too broad.

Full Article and Source:
Judge says Minnesota man with guardian can vote

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

MN: Voter Eligibility for Guardianship Wards

Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer (R-Big Lake) sponsors HF2188 that would clarify voting rights with regard to those under guardianship. She said the goal is to ensure that individuals who are not competent to vote are denied eligibility, while competent individuals aren’t denied.

The impetus for the bill stems from a 2010 incident in Crow Wing County in which a group of mentally disabled adults were allegedly manipulated into voting by their caregivers. The father of one of the affected individuals claims in an affidavit that his son is not mentally competent to vote and thus should have been denied.

Under a 2003 law, individuals under guardianship are presumed to be eligible to vote unless a court declares them otherwise. Kiffmeyer’s bill would reverse this by delineating between individuals under “limited guardianship,” who would be presumed to be eligible, and those under regular guardianship, who would be presumed to be ineligible.

The House Government Operations and Elections Committee approved the bill and referred it to the House Judiciary Policy and Finance Committee. Sen. Paul Gazelka (R-Brainerd) sponsors the companion, SF1753, which awaits action by the Senate Local Government and Elections Committee.

Full Article and Source:
Voter Eligiblility for Individuals Under Guardianship

Saturday, October 29, 2011

91-Year-Old Who Can't Stand Unable to Get Voter ID in TN

If you’re trying to avoid being disenfranchised by your state’s voter ID law, it’s usually a good idea to avoid being a minority, a college student or poor. As it turns out you also probably shouldn’t be 91-years-old and have trouble standing for a long period of time.

Tennessee resident Virginia Lasater found out the hard way after she was unable to get the photo ID required to vote in her state because she wasn’t able to stand in a long line at a DMV:

Lasater told The Daily News Journal that she has voted and worked in campaigns for 70 years. She recently moved to Murfreesboro and on Wednesday registered to vote at the local election commission.

A new law requires voters to show a photo ID at the polls. Since Lasater doesn’t have a photo on her driver’s license, she went to get one. But the testing center was packed and there were no chairs available.

Her son says a clerk told them there was nothing they could do.


Since Tennessee isn’t covered under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, there’s not much the Justice Department can do about the law until after the 2012 elections.

Full Article and Source:
91-Year-Old Who Can't Stand Unable to Get Voter ID in Tennessee

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Voting Vulnerable Adults at Issue

Last year, as a 35-year-old vulnerable adult, Jim [Stene]lived in the Clark Lake Home in Brainerd and voted in the 2010 election via absentee ballot on Oct. 29 in the Crow Wing County historic courthouse along with other group home residents.

Monty Jensen, Crow Wing Township resident, who was also in the courthouse at that time, said he was concerned by what he saw as voter fraud.

On Nov. 1, Jensen filed a complaint with Crow Wing County Attorney Don Ryan’s office.

In his affidavit, Jensen said he witnessed what appeared to be staff members from a group home filling out a client’s ballot and verbally instructing a client who to vote for during absentee balloting.

In March, Ryan said what Jensen observed was somewhat substantiated but he didn’t have evidence of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. It is legal for people in guardianship status to vote in Minnesota and be assisted if needed.

Lynn Peterson, owner of Clark Lake Home, did not return a call seeking comment for this story.

On April 26, Al Stene testified before the House of Representative’s Civil Law Committee along with Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer, R-Big Lake, who authored a bill this spring regarding changes to voter eligibility requirements, including those directed at people placed in guardianships.

The allegations of voter fraud were taken by some as a partisan issue. Stene has maintained that is not his focus.

Full Article and Source:
Vulnerable Adults as Voters at Issue