Voting by mail

My Experience voting by mail 

I have voted in person in every presidential election since 2000.  However, due to the Coronavirus I chose to vote via absentee ballot.  I must admit I was skeptical of the process, because it took some time for my ballot to arrive so I was worried that I was not going to have an opportunity to vote and it be counted.  I feel like it is important for me to document my experience as a first time absentee ballot voter for not only people with disabilities, but others who may have been nervous about the proposition of voting by mail.

First I requested the ballot by completing   I received my ballot on Saturday completed as instructed and mailed it back in the envelope provided to me by the Shelby County election commission.

Instructions for absentee Voting by mail mark the ballot using blue or black pen as shown.Fill in the oval. Do not use a red pen or a pencil. The ballot may say to use a black but either blue or black is fine.

Fold the ballot and seal it in the yellow ballot envelope.

Do not detach the flap. Leave the flap on the envelope and sign. 

Your ballot cannot be counted unless the envelope has been signed.Your signature affirms that you are eligible to vote in this election.(The ballot envelope may have a white sticker or only printed information). 

If someone has helped you vote, your helper and a witness must also sign in this section.Make sure that you sign the envelope that is personalized for you if there are multiple voters in the household. 

Placed the yellow ballot envelope in the white return envelope.

Place postage on the return envelope.One first class stamp is sufficient for this ballot. Mail the ballot.Please note that ballots must be mailed; they will not be counted if they are handed-delivered. Make sure you mail your ballot in time to arrive on or before Election Day.  Ballots received after Election Day cannot be counted.

I mailed my ballot but considering how the United States Postal Service has been backed up I was more than a little bit concerned.  However, it was easy to track the status of my ballot by visiting   https://tnmap.to.gov/voterlookup.  

Enter your voter registration information and the last four digits of your social security number

It will take you to a screen where you will find the date your ballot request was received and the date that your ballot was received by the county.

This is important, because if you chose to vote by mail in Tennessee your ballot must be received by mail on or by Election Day if not your vote will not be counted.  The best way to get a timely answer is to email voteinfo@shelbycountytn.gov.  You can also call 901-222-6800.

It was a simple process and I believe it allowed more people an opportunity to participate in this election cycle.  However, I did miss the experience of standing in line waiting listening to older people talk about their first time voting as I waited to cast my vote. 

Happy Election Day and Remember Every Vote Counts!

ADAPT working to pass the DIA

ADAPT denounces Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) for refusing to cosponsor the Disability Integration Act (S.117)

Today, the disability rights organization ADAPT – American Disabled for Attendant Programs Today – denounced Senator Susan Collins for refusing to cosponsor the Disability Integration Act (S.117/HR.555) despite repeated efforts by advocates to get her to support this important piece of civil rights legislation.

The Disability Integration Act (DIA) is bipartisan and bicameral legislation, introduced by Senators Charles Schumer, Minority Leader (D-NY) and Cory Gardner (R-CO) in the Senate and Representative Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) in the House, to address the fundamental issue that people who need Long Term Services and Supports (LTSS) are forced into institutions and losing their basic civil and human rights. Today, the legislation is more important than ever as elderly and Disabled people – particularly Black and brown people with disabilities – unnecessarily die from COVID-19 because they have been warehoused in nursing facilities and other institutions.

Although Senator Collins has supported programs that fund efforts to transition people with disabilities from institutions into the community, including the Money Follows the Person Demonstration Program, these programs alone do not go far enough. Without an enforceable civil right, people with disabilities will continue to be driven into institutions by states and private managed care companies. This is particularly true for Black and brown people with disabilities who are less able to access home and community based alternatives to institutionalization because of racial disparities.

ADAPT worked with Senator Schumer to craft the Disability Integration Act to ensure that elderly and Disabled people could live in freedom. The bill is being championed by Cory Gardner, however, Senator Collins, in refusing to cosponsor and support this legislation, is sending a clear message that elderly and Disabled Americans should continue to be denied their freedom and most basic rights. Specifically, her refusal to support this legislation demonstrates that:

1. Senator Collins believes that elderly and Disabled Americans who use Long Term Services and Supports should not have a statutory right to live in freedom and – after more than two decades – we should not expand the protections afforded under the Supreme Court’s Olmstead decision so that the Disability Community has a more effective tool for getting – and keeping – people out of institutions.
2. Senator Collins believes that people with disabilities should not be protected from Managed Care Organizations (MCOs) who prioritize their profits over the freedom of elderly and Disabled Americans.
3. Senator Collins believes that freedom is not a fundamental right for elderly and Disabled Americans and “treating professionals” should have the last word about whether they can live in the community. She believes that community integration should only be given to Disabled people when it is determined to be “appropriate” by professionals.
4. Senator Collins believes that pro-institutional mechanisms that are permissible and widespread under current law, including waiting lists, service limitations, cost caps, and inadequate rates, should be maintained.
5. Senator Collins believes that states should continue to have the right to institutionalize people with disabilities using the “fundamental alteration” defense that allows them to deny Disabled people the right to live in freedom based on programmatic and budgetary criteria.
6. Senator Collins believes that elderly and Disabled people should only be given “medically necessary” Long Term Services and Supports and shouldn’t have a right to lead an independent life – which includes getting the supports they need to have pets, children and jobs.
7. Senator Collins believes that elderly and Disabled people should not have the right to sue to secure the affordable, accessible, integrated housing they need to live in freedom.
8. Senator Collins believes that elderly and Disabled people should not be afforded the right to control their own lives because they don’t have an option other than assisted living and supportive housing where service providers control their home and life.
9. Senator Collins believes that states should not be required to implement a vigorous process for public engagement in performing a self-evaluation and developing a transition plan for community integration, and instead we should maintain a system where states can limit public participation in the development of their Olmstead Plans, and without a required external review process, advocates can continue to be legally be excluded.
10. Senator Collins supports maintaining the bottle-necked systems for enforcing the right of Disabled people to live in the community which have failed our community, particularly for those in nursing facilities where at least 75,000 people have died from COVID-19.

With the election is just weeks away, it is imperative that the people of Maine understand that Senator Collins has stood in the way of Disabled people who just want the right to live in freedom. We deserve better than Susan Collins.

ADAPT has worked for decades to secure the same rights and liberties for Disabled Americans as those enjoyed by their non-disabled neighbors. Learn more about ADAPT’s history and activities at www.adapt.org, on social media with the National ADAPT Facebook and Twitter pages. Also, keep up to date on their current endeavors by following the hashtags #DIAToday and #ADAPTandRESIST.

Fact Sheet: Protecting Against Voter Intimidation

Constitutional Advocacy and Protection 

GEORGETOWN LAW

Is voter intimidation illegal?

Yes. The right of each voter to cast his or her ballot free from intimidation or coercion is a foundational principle of a free and democratic society. Federal law prohibits voter intimidation.

Multiple federal statutes make it a crime to intimidate voters: it is illegal to intimidate, threaten, or coerce a person, or attempt to do so, “for the purpose of interfering with” that person’s right “to vote or to vote as he may choose.” 18 U.S.C. § 594. It is also a crime to knowingly and willfully intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person, or attempt to do so, for “registering to vote, or voting,” or for “urging or aiding” anyone to vote or register to vote. 52 U.S.C. § 20511(1). And it is a crime to “by force or threat of force” willfully injure, intimidate, or interfere with any person because he or she is voting or has voted or “in order to intimidate” anyone from voting. 18 U.S.C. § 245(b)(1)(A)

Federal law also provides for civil lawsuits based on voter intimidation. Section 11 of the Voting Rights Act makes it unlawful to “intimidate, threaten, or coerce” another person, or attempt to do so, “for voting or attempting to vote” or “for urging or aiding any person to vote or attempt to vote.” 52 U.S.C. § 10307(b). And Section 2 of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 makes it unlawful for “two or more persons to conspire to prevent by force, intimidation, or threat,” any voter from casting a ballot for the candidate of his or her choice. 42 U.S.C. § 1985(3).

Every state also separately prohibits interference with voters and voter intimidation.

What are examples of voter intimidation?

The U.S. Department of Justice has explained that voter intimidation is conduct that is intended to compel prospective voters to vote against their preferences, or to not vote at all, through activity that is reasonably calculated to instill fear. Some actions that ordinarily would be legal may be unlawful if they are intended to intimidate voters.

Voter intimidation is often subtle and context-dependent, so it can be difficult to identify in advance. Here are some examples of conduct near polling sites that likely would constitute illegal voter intimidation, although other conduct could also qualify:

• Violent behavior inside or outside the polling site

• Confronting voters while wearing military-style or official-looking uniforms

• Brandishing firearms or the intimidating display of firearms

• Disrupting voting lines or blocking the entrance to the polling place

• Following voters to, from, or within the polling place

• Verbal threats of violence

• Spreading false information about voter fraud, voting requirements, or related criminal penalties

• Aggressively approaching voters’ vehicles or writing down voters’ license plate numbers

• Harassing voters, aggressively questioning them about their qualifications to vote

Are guns permitted at polling places?

Sometimes. As the Giffords Law Center explains, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, and the District of Columbia “explicitly prohibit guns at polling locations,” while Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, and South Carolina “prohibit concealed firearms at the polls.” Guns may also be prohibited when polling locations are in K–12 schools and other property where firearms are not permitted.

Even where guns are not explicitly prohibited, they may not be used to intimidate voters. Nor may armed groups of individuals patrol polling locations or otherwise engage in activities reserved for law enforcement or official state militias. Fact sheets containing state laws banning private unauthorized militia activity are available at http://bit.ly/50factsheets.

Does the First Amendment protect intimidating speech?

Not always. The First Amendment does not protect intimidation in the form of “true threats,” “where the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence” against another person or group. Virginia v. Black, 538 U.S. 343, 360 (2003).

Even when speech is not openly threatening, states and localities nonetheless may impose some restrictions on speech in order to protect the integrity of elections and the rights of voters to cast their ballots free from intimidation. In Burson v. Freeman, 504 U.S. 191 (1992), the Supreme Court upheld a Tennessee law that banned campaigning within 100 feet of the entrance to a polling place. 

Nearly every state has a similar law protecting voters against electioneering in the immediate vicinity of the polls. Although speech outside this limited distance may be entitled to greater protections, jurisdictions likely could, for example, require any demonstrations to remain a reasonable distance away from the path that voters must take into the polling place in order to guard against intimidation.

What does it mean to be a poll watcher?

State law regulates those who are permitted to observe the voting process within a polling place, sometimes called “poll watchers” or “election observers,” and what those observers are permitted to do. State law also governs who is permitted to challenge a voter’s qualifications to vote and what a challenger must show to make such a challenge. These laws vary from state to state. 

Election officials should be familiar with these laws to prevent unauthorized observation or challenges and to ensure that such activities are not used for purposes of intimidation. Even if your qualifications to vote are challenged, you may still cast a regular ballot unless that challenge is sustained, and, at a minimum, you always have the right to cast a provisional ballot before leaving the polling site.

What should I do if I see or experience voter intimidation?

✓ If you fear imminent violence, call 9-1-1.

✓ Notify your local election official at your polling place.

✓ Document what you saw or experienced: what happened, where, and when, and whether any voters were deterred from voting.

✓ Call Election Protection at 866-OUR-VOTE (866-687-8683). Assistance is also available in Spanish at 888-VE-Y-VOTA (888- 839-8682), in Arabic at 844-YALLA-US (844-915- 5187), and Asian languages at 888-API-VOTE (1-888-174-8683). A video American Sign Language line is available at 301-818-VOTE (301-818-8683).

Is it legal to act as a private militia in Tennessee?

No. All 50 states prohibit private, unauthorized militias and military units from engaging in activities reserved for the state militia, including law enforcement activities. Some, including Tennessee, also prohibit paramilitary activity during or in furtherance of a civil disorder. Tennessee’s laws are described below:

Tennessee Constitution: The Tennessee Constitution forbids private military units from operating outside state authority, providing that “in all case the military shall be kept in strict subordination to the civil authority.” Tenn. Const. art. I, § 24.

Tennessee Statutes – Prohibition on paramilitary activity: It is a felony in Tennessee to assemble with one or more persons “for the purpose of training or instructing in the use of, or practicing with, any technique or means capable of causing property damage, bodily injury or death with the intent to employ such training, instruction or practice in the commission of a civil disorder.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-314.

This Fact Sheet has been prepared by the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection (ICAP) at Georgetown University Law Center. ICAP’s mission is to use the power of the courts to defend American constitutional rights and values. Visit us at https://www.law.georgetown.edu/icap/. Contact us at reachICAP@georgetown.edu.

Comment on the Fairness to Seniors and People with Disabilities During COVID-19 Act

Fairness to Seniors and People with Disabilities During COVID-19 Act (S. 4830)

On Thursday, October 22, Senators Brown, Casey, and Wyden introduced the Fairness to Seniors and People with Disabilities During COVID-19 Act (S. 4830). This legislation would protect older adults and people with disabilities from being required to repay extra Social Security or SSI benefits they received from the Social Security Administration (SSA) due to the agency suspending certain work during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is the companion bill to HR 7830, introduced in the House by Rep. Danny Davis.  

If passed into law, it would require SSA to automatically waive all overpayments that occurred between March 1 and December 31, 2020, without requiring the overpaid individual to request a waiver, unless there was determination of fraud, similar fault, or misuse by a representative payee in causing the overpayment.  

However, SSA has already published an interim final rule that sets up a “streamlined” waiver process for individuals who were overpaid between March 1 and September 30, 2020. This process requires the individual to contact SSA to request a waiver, even though SSA has already determined that the agency was at fault in causing the overpayment, and it would be “against equity and good conscience” to require the individual to repay the benefits.   

Justice in Aging submitted comments in response to this rule, urging SSA to waive all COVID-related overpayments automatically, without requiring individuals to request waivers. We believe this is the most equitable and efficient method for handling overpayments during this pandemic period, and is the approach taken in the Fairness for Seniors and People with Disabilities During COVID-19 Act. 

Today, Monday, October 26, is the final day to submit comments to SSA about the interim final rule.