ATLANTA (AP) — Republicans and conservative activists are increasingly criticizing an executive order issued three years ago by the Biden administration to raise voter registration, saying it is unconstitutional and an attempt to interfere in the November election.
A recent fundraising email sent by a Republican political action committee is an example of how they are interpreting the order, saying it forces federal agencies to “act as Biden’s personal voter mobilization machine.” A Republican-led House committee recently sent subpoenas to the agency heads, and a group of Republican secretaries of state have asked the Supreme Court to take up the challenge to the order.
Despite opposition from the right, there is no evidence that the arrangement favors voters of one party over another.
White House spokeswoman Robyn Patterson said the administration would continue to protect the voting rights of eligible citizens regardless of their political affiliation. Biden issued the order in 2021 as Republican legislatures across the country were debating a wave of state voting restrictions amid false claims that widespread voter fraud cost former President Donald Trump re-election.
“These are baseless claims from the very people who spread debunked lies about the 2020 election and used those debunked lies to push through laws across the country that make it harder to vote and easier to undermine the will of the people,” Patterson said in a statement.
Here’s what the order does, what federal agencies have done so far to comply with it, and what Republicans are saying about it.
Should make voting easier
Biden issued the executive order on March 7, 2021, emphasizing the federal government’s “obligation to ensure that voter registration and voting are simple and straightforward for all eligible voters” and that this would be implemented “consistent with applicable law.” Agency heads were asked to submit a strategic plan within 200 days.
The order called for updates to the federal website vote.gov, including ensuring that voting information is made available in more than a dozen languages. The website is not directly involved in voter registration but connects visitors with state and local election offices to begin the registration process.
The order specifically mentions the Department of Defense and asks it to establish procedures that give busy military members the opportunity to register, update their voter registration information, or request an absentee ballot each year.
It also directs the Justice Department to provide people in federal custody with educational materials about registration and voting prior to their release, and to inform them about regulations that could prohibit them from voting.
Republicans question approach
A year after the executive order was passed, Republican members of Congress sent a letter to the White House expressing concern that the administration was exceeding its authority and directing federal agencies to conduct activities beyond their duties.
Republicans said the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service had informed state agencies that voter registration costs were allowable as administrative expenses under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and could be “reimbursed at 50 percent.”
“The use of the nation’s multi-billion dollar nutrition program to implement the Biden administration’s voter registration system is not only a cause for concern, it also deserves closer scrutiny,” the Republicans wrote.
What the letter did not mention, according to a former White House official who helped implement the order, is that states administer the food assistance program and that states were specifically directed to provide their voter registration information because of a federal law passed years ago.
Justin Levitt, a senior White House policy adviser, also said the agency was simply reiterating its previous statement that these expenses were reimbursable.
A few months later, Republicans sent letters to federal authorities requesting information about their plans to comply with the order and demanding that the order be repealed in a sweeping election bill they introduced last year.
Last month, the chairman of the House Committee on Administration sent letters requesting documents related to the order and setting a two-week deadline to comply. The chairman, Republican Rep. Bryan Steil of Wisconsin, issued subpoenas in response, calling the federal order “yet another attempt by the Biden administration to tip the balance before 2024.”
A White House official said the Office of Management and Budget had sent an initial response and other agencies were working to answer the committee’s questions when it issued the subpoenas.
The contract requires the approval of the state
While federal authorities have not yet released their proposals, they have announced steps they have taken to comply with the order.
Levitt, a lawyer and constitutional law expert, called the order groundbreaking but narrow in scope. Although federal law allows agencies to assist with voter registration, he said that before Biden’s order, only military recruiting offices did so. He also said that a federal agency could only do so if a state requested it.
“Most of what the authorities have done is exactly what the states have asked them to do, or they have clarified the rules to make sure people know what the rules are,” Levitt said.
Kansas and New Mexico have designated two Native American colleges operated by the U.S. Department of the Interior as voter registration authorities. Kentucky and Michigan have announced that they will establish Veterans Administration offices in their states. Michigan also plans to establish federal Small Business Administration offices.
Request to the Supreme Court to intervene
A group of Republicans who serve as their state’s top election officials also criticized the order, calling it a federal government intrusion into states’ election administration.
West Virginia Secretary of State Mac Warner urged Biden to repeal the law in a letter in May 2022 and opposed it during his testimony before Congress last year. A few months ago, he issued a statement saying his state would refuse to accept voter registration forms obtained by federal agencies.
“Involving federal agencies in an already complex administrative process will make it even more difficult for election officials to ensure timely and accurate pre-election registration services,” he said in a statement in April.
In May, Warner, along with eight other Republican secretaries of state from Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire, Tennessee and Wyoming, filed a brief with the U.S. Supreme Court urging the justices to take up a case challenging the order.
The court denied a request to hear and decide the case by the end of June. It will not be heard for the first time until the justices’ first private conference in early fall. In the unlikely event that the court agrees to hear the case, the hearing would not take place until early next year.
“As harmless as an order can be”
Republicans opposing the order are calling it “Bidenbucks,” an apparent reference to the controversy that erupted after the 2020 election when Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg gave more than $350 million to a nonprofit that was later distributed to election offices. Republicans claim the “Zuckerbucks” effort was an attempt to give Democrats an advantage.
David Becker, a former Justice Department lawyer who directs the Center for Election Innovation & Research, said the timing of the increased criticism — years after Biden issued the executive order and just months before the presidential election — is notable.
“It’s being portrayed as a deep state power grab, when in reality it’s about making sure that eligible citizens who come into contact with the federal government can easily register or update their registration,” Becker said. “It’s as harmless as an order can get.”
He said a key benefit of the federal order is that it gives voters who are already registered the opportunity to update their information, which would make voter rolls more correct, something Republicans say is necessary.
“It’s good for the integrity of the elections. It’s good for participation,” Becker said. “It wasn’t controversial in the past.”
___
Associated Press writer Mark Sherman in Washington contributed to this report.
