OK Voter Drives at VA Facilities 

July 16, 2008 - Why the federal Department of Veterans Affairs wants to meddle in voter registration is a mystery. Those inclined to be more charitable might say it's just another example of government bureaucracy looking for new a way to expand its influence. But those not so kind might interpret it as an effort to improperly affect the political process in some form.

Either way, officials in our state have been more than justified in mounting a campaign against an agency that has no business limiting registration activities but is trying to do so.

Seemingly out of the blue, the VA this spring declared that voter registration drives are barred at veterans' homes, hospitals and other federal veterans' facilities.

Why?

Veterans Affairs Secretary James Peake maintains, No. 1, that it is to avoid "disruptions to facility operations," and No. 2, to comply with the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees using government time or resources for political activities.

The agency ostensibly is trying to avoid involvement by partisan groups, one spokesman said. A statement indicated that the VA would have volunteers assist with voter registration, as well as with absentee ballots, if help is requested.

Nonsense, say Connecticut Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz and Attorney General Richard Blumenthal.

Mr. Blumenthal said the Hatch Act in no way affects nonpartisan activities. In a written legal opinion, he declared: "In my view, this directive should be withdrawn and revised immediately by the Department of Veterans Affairs because it is flawed and unfounded in law, and fatally unfair in its restraint on veterans rights."

Ms. Bysiewicz for her part called it "a slap in the face to people who have served, put their lives on the line and sacrificed the most for our fundamental freedoms." The Democratic secretary has joined with Republican Secretary of State Sam Reed of Washington state to launch a national effort to overturn the directive, according to news reports. Also signed on are secretaries of state from Ohio, Montana, Vermont, Rhode Island, Minnesota, Kansas, New Hampshire and Maine, as well as several U.S. senators.

The attorney general said Connecticut would take the matter to court if necessary, and has given the VA until tomorrow to respond.

A desire not to have veterans' facilities needlessly disrupted by voter registration or related activities is understandable. But a presumption that sensible accommodation of such activities couldn't be worked out individually is misguided. Meanwhile, it is hard to understand how such accommodation could somehow represent a Hatch violation.

Then there is the suspicion that federal officials might want to hold down registration, not for the comfort of veterans but for political purposes.

Voter registration and voting have largely been left to state authorities to handle. They seem to have done an acceptable job in meeting their responsibilities, and no doubt would do so at VA facilities.

On the other hand, this inept effort by a federal agency that is not otherwise involved in the voting process shows why it should stay out of it and let the experts work out such matters.