Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has helped to launch NoVoterLeftBehind.net, a project of Democrats for America's Future (DAF). The site is designed to monitor voter registration and to monitor the voting process during the November 2008 election. The goal is to bring attention to any irregularities that occur and to urge "every Democratic candidate to pledge not to concede a single race until every last vote is counted."

"This is about more -- far more -- than who wins the next election, as important as that is. If we can't guarantee the citizens of a democracy that their votes will be counted, every other liberty we hold dear is at risk," said Kennedy in a letter he sent to Democrats across the county.

In the Press Release, Barbara Roberts, former Oregon Governor and Secretary of State, said "from the voter registration process to Election Day challenges and beyond -- DAF will fight every last fight to the very end, insisting that every American is guaranteed a democracy's most sacred right: their vote."

A new group the American Issues Project (AIP) has been caught in controversy over an ad linking candidate Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) to former domestic terrorist William Ayers. As a 501(c)(4) organization it is allowed to air a political ad as long as the majority of its spending is nonpolitical, it cannot accept money from corporations, and it must identify the donors that finance its ads in reports to the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The ad however, is being considered by some to be a violation of election law.

The ad "Know Enough" has images of Obama and Ayers, with a narrator asking, "Why would Barack Obama be friends with someone who bombed the Capitol and is proud of it? Do you know enough to elect Barack Obama?"

Those who are calling the ad illegal consider it to clearly be express advocacy; the ad concerns an election, takes a position on the character and fitness for office of the candidate, and raises no legislative issue. The Ayers ad mentions Obama's name and uses the word "elect." According to the Supreme Court decision in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, an ad can be regulated and considered express advocacy "only if the ad is susceptible of no reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate."

In response, Obama's general counsel wrote letters to television stations, asserting that the Ayers ad is illegal and false, and that its airing is subject to a FEC penalty. The letter states that Obama never called Ayers "respectable" and "mainstream." In addition a letter was sent to the Department of Justice (DOJ) requesting an investigation into the group's activities for possible violations of campaign finance law.

According to a Politico story, a spokesman for AIP Christian Pinkston said, "This is a sad ploy to circumvent the First Amendment by a campaign who has no arguments with the merits of our ad. It's the classic maneuver: If you can't win on the merits, file a lawsuit."

AIP submitted an independent expenditure report that indicates the group is spending nearly $3 million on television ads attacking Obama.

Yes, Hans von Spakovsky has been hired to work with the U.S. Civil Rights Commission. This is interesting considering his record of supporting voting restrictions. He eventually withdrew his nomination to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) because of such strong opposition. According to the Washington Post; "During Senate confirmation hearings to determine whether von Spakovsky would sit on the FEC, former civil service employees at Justice submitted a letter condemning his actions on voting rights. The letter said von Spakovsky acted as a de facto voting section chief from 2003 to 2005, 'furthering partisan interests.' [. . .] Von Spakovsky steered the department to adopt 'voting rights policies not seen before, pushing to curb minor instances of election fraud by imposing sweeping restrictions that would make it harder, not easier, for Democratic-leaning poor and minority voters to cast ballots."

Wal-Mart is being charged with engaging in illegal electioneering by warning its employees against voting for Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama (D-IL). Watch this YouTube video and witness a complaint being filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) against Wal-Mart. According to the Wall Street Journal ($$), "Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is mobilizing its store managers and department supervisors around the country to warn that if Democrats win power in November, they'll likely change federal law to make it easier for workers to unionize companies - including Wal-Mart."

"Wal-Mart may be walking a fine legal line by holding meetings with its store department heads that link politics with a strong antiunion message. Federal election rules permit companies to advocate for specific political candidates to its executives, stockholders and salaried managers, but not to hourly employees."

The Center for Civic Policy, a 501(c)(3) organization in New Mexico, distributed a series of mailers regarding the voting records of some members of the state legislature months before the June 3 primary. After losing the primary election, three lawmakers have sued Aug. 1, asserting that the group committed fraud in the financing of campaigns against them, alleging that the group's efforts crossed the line into political activity. They also want the group to register as a political action committee to fully disclose its funders. Meanwhile, New Mexico Attorney General Gary King asserted that the activities crossed the line into campaigning and requested the Secretary of State require them to register as a political committee.

"There's an old saying that if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then its probably a duck," say AG King. "And I think we know a duck when we see one."

And reportedly, the Secretary of State now agrees.

The executive director of the Center for Civic Policy Eli Il Yong Lee, stated; "Any effort to restrict this legal activity would muzzle New Mexico nonprofits from doing the very important job of keeping public officials accountable."

Flaws in voter machines nationwide will not be fixed by the November elections. The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) announced that they will not be able to certify necessary upgrades before the general election. States vary in policies concerning whether or not federal certification of voter machines is required.

The certification process slowed down considerably when the Election Assistance Commission began certifying voter machines. Prior to that, it had been performed by the National Association of State Election Directors through a volunteer program they operate. There has been no new equipment certified since the EAC took over the certification process.

There have been numerous problems nationwide as a result of faulty machines. The New York Times highlighted some of these problems in a recent article. Chris Nelson, the secretary of state in South Dakota, told the Times that "[i]n 2006 the ballot-marking devices used by disabled voters incorrectly marked 50 to 100 ballots. The machine maker says it has fixed the problem but the state cannot install the fix without certification." The slowdown in certification is forcing many jurisdictions to forego much needed updates to their voter machines.

Also, there were many problems with the machines before the EAC took over the certification process. Many groups familiar with the process believe that one reason for the slowdown is that the new standards are much stricter, partially as a result of problems with faulty machines that were not detected earlier.

According to the Times, "A draft report out this month by the Government Accountability Office, the Congressional Watchdog, said the current system left states on their own to discover voting machine problems. The report calls for Congress to revise the Help America Vote Act and provide the commission with the authority and resources it needs to resolve problems with machines that were certified before the commission took over the process."

A Sept. 10 hearing is scheduled for the Real Truth About Obama Inc.'s (RTAO) lawsuit. RTAO is requesting that the Federal Election Commission (FEC) is prohibited from enforcing reporting requirements for independent political groups. The rules being challenged could require a group to disclose its finances, limit contributions to $5,000 per contributor and ban corporate and union money if the group is considered by the FEC to be a "political committee."

The RTAO lawsuit references a Department of Justice letter to Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer that said DOJ would "vigorously pursue instances where individuals knowingly and intentionally violate clear commands" of the Federal Election Campaign Act.

According to BNA Money and Politics ($$), the FEC is questioning the assignment of U.S. District Judge James Spencer, a federal judge who has ruled against campaign finance regulations in the past. A motion filed by FEC lawyers details that the plaintiffs had intentionally sought Judge Spencer's assignment to the case and suggested that the case be reassigned through a random process.

Specifically, "a case brought by the Virginia Society for Human Life (VSHL) in 2000, in which the judge ruled against an FEC regulation defining 'express advocacy' more broadly than a few 'magic words' referring to elections. [. . .] RTAO cited the VSHL matter as a 'related case,' apparently helping to ensure that. The FEC indicated that VSHL, a case decided seven years ago involving questions that have been subject to subsequent litigation and rulings by the Supreme Court, could not properly be viewed as 'related' to a new case."

Homeless citizens encounter hurdles that can make registering to vote a difficult process. They often have problems establishing residency. Adding to these obstacles are new voter identification requirements that are gaining ground across the country. It is often difficult for homeless citizens to maintain identification because they are transient, their belongings are sometimes destroyed, and they are sometimes subjected to police sweeps. Thus, many homeless citizens do not have birth certificates or identification cards.

However, there are ways to overcome some of these challenges. It is not necessary for a U.S. citizen to have a fixed address to vote. A citizen living in a shelter or on the street can also vote. It is necessary, however, to have a valid mailing address. A voter registration or confirmation card is often sent through the mail after the person has registered. If the card is returned to election officials as undeliverable, then the individual might not be registered.

In many areas, organizations, such as shelters, churches and community groups can provide homeless citizens with valid addresses.

An Article by the Pew Center on the States mentions that "Judicial opinions in recent years have upheld the notion that requiring a traditional dwelling can pose a hardship to some voters. Court decisions from a number of states have stated that street corners, parks and other public places can be used to establish local voting precincts."

Some registrars accept the precise location on the street where the homeless citizen is staying, but the registrars need a mailing address to send voter information, including a registration card, to the individual.

In June a federal appeals court struck down Federal Election Commission (FEC) rules dealing with coordination rules between candidates and outside groups. Reportedly, the FEC has not appealed the court decision ordering a rewrite of the rules. According to BNA Money and Politics ($$), "FEC Chairman Donald McGahn indicated at a commission meeting July 28 that the FEC could consider issuing advisory rulings on pressing issues in the run-up to the November election, including questions about permissible pre-election activity that may have been raised by the Shays III ruling. McGahn said that political parties and others may have questions about issues such as whether their plans for get-out-the-vote activities comply with the law."

A recent Watcher article addressed the possibility that FEC coordination rules on grassroots lobbying efforts may become more serious as the result of the June 13 ruling. An FEC complaint was filed seeking an investigation into an ad that featured House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and former Speaker Newt Gingrich. Pelosi was running for re-election in a June 3 primary and the ad aired in her district within 90 days of the primary election, and it was not paid for by Pelosi's campaign. The FEC coordination rules prohibit referencing a candidate within 90 days of a primary and 120 days of a general election. The complaint seeks an investigation into a possible case of illegal corporate contribution to Pelosi's campaign.

The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) issued a press release today unveiling a new program called "Prepared to Vote," which is designed to protect voter rights.

"Prepared to Vote is a program designed to raise every voter's awareness of the many obstacles in the electoral process that could affect their right to vote in the 2008 election. Through Prepared to Vote we hope to ensure that every eligible voter casts a vote that counts," said John Payton, LDF President and Director-Counsel.

According to the LDF press release, the Prepared to Vote program was "[i]nspired by the Freedom School Model from the Civil Rights Movement … [and] seeks to empower communities of color by providing essential information prior to Election Day. Program components include community-based workshops, the dissemination of user-friendly materials, meetings with election officials, and a dynamic educational website preparedtovote.org."

The Prepared to Vote program is designed to address issues that have served as barriers to voting in past elections. Some of the issues that the program will address are "voter ID requirements, voter purges, faulty voter rolls, poorly trained elections officials, and felon disfranchisement statutes," among other issues.

The program seeks to ensure that voters are not disenfranchised in the upcoming Presidential Election and that "America's democratic processes are administered uniformly and fairly in communities of color." To that end, LDF will deploy field attorneys to 10 states to prevent voter disfranchisement.

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in Canyon Ferry Road Baptist Church v. Unswort, a challenge to Montana's election campaign reporting laws. The Canyon Ferry Road Baptist Church held an event in May 2004, and during which the Rev. B.G. Stumberg urged parishioners to sign petitions at the church in support of a constitutional ban on gay marriages. Advocates filed a complaint arguing that the church inappropriately held an event to support a political cause subject to the state's political contribution reporting requirements. The Montana Commissioner of Political Practices had previously ruled that the church should have reported its activities to get voters to pass a constitutional ban on gay marriage.

Reportedly; "Lawyers for the church filed a lawsuit in federal court, arguing the parishioners' rights to free speech and religious expression under the First and Fourteenth amendments were being trampled by the 'vague' and 'ambiguous' election laws."

A new web site has been set up, Pass223.com, to gain support for the Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act (S. 223) with the hopes that it will eventually be approved by the Senate. S.223 would require senators to file their contribution reports electronically.

Currently, presidential candidates and candidates running for the House of Representatives file their campaign contributions in electronic form. Electronic filing speeds the process by which campaign contribution data reaches the public over the Internet, allowing citizens and journalists to more easily spot a conflict of interest or an inappropriate contribution. Filers in the Senate do not file electronically, delaying disclosure by weeks and possibly months.

Senator John Ensign (R-AZ) continues to block the bill by insisting on adding an amendment that would force charities, religious organizations and other nonprofits to disclose their donors when they file ethics complaints against senators. OMB Watch supports S.223 and recognizes that in order for it to pass, Ensign's amendment must be removed.

By going to Pass223.com you can find out instructions on how to call your senators along with a suggested script, and instructions on how to report back on how they stand on the issue.

The Washington Independent recently did a story on how illogical it is that this bill remains stalled. "Voters hoping to learn who's contributing to their lawmakers this election season instead find a gaping hole: Due to antiquated rules requiring senators to file campaign disclosures on paper, the records of upper chamber members take weeks to process. The procedure means that donations made closest to November's elections will go largely unseen until well after the last vote has been cast. [. . .] Meanwhile, observers can continue to scratch their heads over why the upper chamber can't evolve into the 21st Century."