Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose carried out the purge hundreds of thousands of voters from the lists, arguing that it was essential to protect “election integrity.” But the watchdog found that while LaRose claims to protect election integrity, Ohio has tender protections against removing eligible voters from the rolls.
According to LaRose’s accounts, fraudulent voting in Ohio is an almost non-existent problem.
LaRose found infinitesimal 0.0005% “potentially illegal” votes in the last presidential elections. Yet he insists that his aggressive voter purges have no other purpose than to protect voter rolls.
It is typical for election officials to perform routine maintenance on state voter rolls. But some states go much further, and a study last year found that Ohio’s practices are among those most likely to eliminate eligible voters – and those voters are rather minorities– said the American Bar Association in its 2020 report.
A study of 10 states released behind schedule last year found that Ohio had the worst voter removal practices during voter purges and was among the worst in purging eligible voters.
It was produced by In demonstrationsa progressive think tank focused on voter access, campaign finance reform and economic justice. Future President Barack Obama was a member of its founding board and group in 2000 questioned in the past LaRose’s purge tactics.
He paid particular attention to Ohio’s voter purges, stating that “at almost every turn the state has made it difficult for voters to remain on the registration rolls, and the entirety of Ohio’s voter purge practices – from inactivity purges to failure to notify voters – have been purged for alleged felony convictions.” or a finding of mental incapacity, the lack of a process by which voters could challenge their removal, the broad authority to challenge a voter’s eligibility – escalate the likelihood that eligible voters will be improperly removed.”
LaRose’s office did not respond to questions for this story.
In an interview, Roni Druks, senior advisor at Dēmos, made a distinction between the routine maintenance of voter lists and voter purges.
“Voter purges occur when election officials engage in practices such as those in Ohio that essentially have the effect of removing otherwise eligible voters from state voter rolls,” she said.
The main way Ohio and a minority of other states do this is through “use it or lose it” practices, as the American Bar Association said in 2020 ““should be seen as grossly unconstitutional – removing people from the rolls solely because they missed voting in several consecutive elections and did not respond to a letter asking for proof of residence.”
As Druks explained, neither the law nor the U.S. Constitution require people to vote to remain eligible.
“Not voting is not a disqualification,” she said. “Apathy towards our political process is not a voter disqualification. I think we need to reach out to people who feel disconnected.”
In 2019, LaRose’s office released a list of 235,000 voters to be removed from the rolls. It was riddled with errors and according to the New York Times, about 40,000 people, or 20%, voted for her, even though they were eligible to vote.
In its 2020 report, the Bar Association noted: “Lack of regular voting correlates with lower socioeconomic status and, at least in some places, with being a racial minority,” it said.
Minority voters strongly lean toward the Democratic Party. LaRose is a Republican.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
