Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

1-Old-Man

(2,667 posts)
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:24 AM Aug 2012

Why do states have the ability to regulate national elections?

Why is it that the requirements to be able to vote in a national election can be different from one state to another. Is this not a violation of the 'equal protection' clause of the Constitution? Does being a citizen of the United States mean one thing in Pennsylvania and Ohio and another thing in California or Maryland?

20 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why do states have the ability to regulate national elections? (Original Post) 1-Old-Man Aug 2012 OP
Great questions. I thought the Voting Rights Act put an end to states' interference. sinkingfeeling Aug 2012 #1
keep in mind Animal Chin Aug 2012 #2
I don't think the question was just about the president. DURHAM D Aug 2012 #4
Exactly 1-Old-Man Aug 2012 #5
You don't vote for president directly ramblin_dave Aug 2012 #3
and I counter with these words, "the Senate and the House". 1-Old-Man Aug 2012 #6
The Senate and the House are state level federal offices ramblin_dave Aug 2012 #9
I think it's because we have a federal government cherokeeprogressive Aug 2012 #7
Maybe it comes under Article I Section 4 limpyhobbler Aug 2012 #8
And there is the rub. Ruby the Liberal Aug 2012 #17
Right. limpyhobbler Aug 2012 #18
Yeah - like the Speaker of the PA House. Ruby the Liberal Aug 2012 #19
Because technically, the states make up the nation Spike89 Aug 2012 #10
Amendment X to the Constitution of the United States slackmaster Aug 2012 #11
This, Sir, is Lame, Tea-Bag Style Barnyard Product The Magistrate Aug 2012 #13
And one more BumRushDaShow Aug 2012 #15
Probably should have been changed after the Civil War. moondust Aug 2012 #12
That wouldn't have always worked. Igel Aug 2012 #14
You could probably separate federal from other elections. moondust Aug 2012 #16
They are technucally voting for a state slate of electors cthulu2016 Aug 2012 #20

Animal Chin

(175 posts)
2. keep in mind
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:31 AM
Aug 2012

you have no constitutional right to vote. Presidents are elected by the electoral college. Each state is free to determine how it determines its members of the electoral college.

DURHAM D

(32,595 posts)
4. I don't think the question was just about the president.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:35 AM
Aug 2012

House and Senate members are federal officers.

1-Old-Man

(2,667 posts)
5. Exactly
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:37 AM
Aug 2012

That plus 'equal protection under the law' seems to imply that we will be treated the same, not treated as the will of some 50 different electorates dictates at the moment.

ramblin_dave

(1,546 posts)
3. You don't vote for president directly
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 11:32 AM
Aug 2012

You vote for a slate of electors from your state to the Electoral College. These electors then vote for president and vp.

So we the people don't have national elections, just state level elections.

ramblin_dave

(1,546 posts)
9. The Senate and the House are state level federal offices
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 12:19 PM
Aug 2012

There are no national senators or representatives.

limpyhobbler

(8,244 posts)
8. Maybe it comes under Article I Section 4
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 12:05 PM
Aug 2012

Article I.
Section 4. The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations...


Not sure what the courts have cited to uphold voter id laws but maybe it falls under the "manner of holding elections".

Ruby the Liberal

(26,216 posts)
17. And there is the rub.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 02:01 PM
Aug 2012

Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act prohibits poll taxes, which is how the VoterID laws are being implemented in many states. Between the cost and the inaccessibility of many of the locations to obtain the legal identification (with requisite expiration date) - it becomes cost prohibitive for many.

http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/vot/sec_2/about_sec2.php

limpyhobbler

(8,244 posts)
18. Right.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 02:56 PM
Aug 2012

And it's even worse when you have people explicitly admitting that they are doing it to supress turnout among certain groups, as I believe was the case in Florida.

Spike89

(1,569 posts)
10. Because technically, the states make up the nation
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 12:21 PM
Aug 2012

There are not national elections, only state elections for federal positions.

 

slackmaster

(60,567 posts)
11. Amendment X to the Constitution of the United States
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 12:24 PM
Aug 2012

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The Magistrate

(95,237 posts)
13. This, Sir, is Lame, Tea-Bag Style Barnyard Product
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 12:49 PM
Aug 2012

Post #8 above gives the correct citation for Congressional elections, including the express statement the Congress can over-ride state legislators in the matter;

In regard to Presidential electors, there are a variety of specific Constititional directives, commencing with Article II, Section 1:

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The Congress may determine the Time of choosing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

Further modifications to this may be found here:

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/provisions.html

Of specific interest might be these:

Fifteenth Amendment

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Nineteenth Amendment

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Twenty-Fourth Amendment

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

BumRushDaShow

(127,289 posts)
15. And one more
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 01:47 PM
Aug 2012
Twenty-Sixth Amendment

SECTION 1.

The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.

SECTION 2.

The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

moondust

(19,917 posts)
12. Probably should have been changed after the Civil War.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 12:39 PM
Aug 2012

Standardization to avoid the kinds of states' rights chicanery that was bound to happen sooner or later.

Igel

(35,191 posts)
14. That wouldn't have always worked.
Thu Aug 16, 2012, 01:40 PM
Aug 2012

Remember: Primaries are held by the state working for the parties. They're party-level elections.

And there are only a handful of state representatives that function at the federal level: electors, senators, representatives.

It's not an uncommon occurrence for the needs of one or a few to impose requirements on the many. But they have to be real needs and not just convenient excuses because we trust those far off more than we trust those nearby.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why do states have the ab...