US service members abroad caught in the middle of overseas ballot battle raging between House Dems, GOP
Democrats say restrictions GOP lawmakers are seeking would disenfranchise thousands of U.S. service members and their spouses living overseas.
A group of House Democrats is protesting proposed GOP-led voting restrictions cracking down on overseas ballots, arguing that the measure – the latest in a string of GOP-led efforts to strengthen election security – is overly restrictive and risks disenfranchising thousands of U.S. service members stationed abroad.
Their protest comes just weeks after six out of eight House Republicans from Pennsylvania's congressional delegation filed a federal lawsuit earlier this month, aiming to get the Keystone State to add additional vetting processes for U.S. residents living overseas.
Republican plaintiffs argued that current law makes it possible for these residents to register and vote in elections without proper identification. They can then "receive a ballot by email and then vote a ballot without providing identification at any step in the process," the group alleged.
FLURRY OF PRE-ELECTION LEGAL CASES IS NOW 'STANDARDIZED' STRATEGY, EXPERTS SAY
But that contention has been met with fierce resistance by the half-dozen Democrats in Congress, who argued that the level of vetting sought by Republicans would disenfranchise "tens of thousands" of overseas voters in their states – including, importantly, U.S. service men and women stationed abroad.
In a letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, six Democrats, all of whom served in the U.S. military, voiced deep concern over the lawsuit and its potential for discounting the votes of U.S. service members in key battleground states.
The letter, sent by Reps. Pat Ryan of New York, Seth Moulton of Massachusetts, Chrissy Houlahan and Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania, and Mike Thompson and Salud Carbajal of California, and shared with Fox News, argued that the GOP-led push is an unfounded attempt to discount the votes of a once-Republican demographic, which has shifted in recent years to favor Democratic candidates.
The lawsuit, they added, threatens to disenfranchise "tens of thousands" of service members abroad.
And in a neck-and-neck election, this group of voters could play a decisive role.
More than 1.2 million overseas ballots were cast in the 2020 election, according to data from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. In Pennsylvania alone, there are roughly 25,000 registered U.S. voters living abroad.
"Election-denying extremists, afraid they are losing this election, are actively working to disenfranchise members of our military deployed outside of the United States," Houlahan, an Air Force veteran, told Fox News.
NEBRASKA HIGH COURT RESTORES VOTING RIGHT FOR THOUSANDS OF CONVICTED FELONS
All six Republicans named in the lawsuit had also voted against certifying Pennsylvania's electoral votes in the 2020 election, she added.
But in the final sprint to Election Day in a dead-heat presidential race, these court battles aren't confined solely to Pennsylvania.
In recent weeks, the Republican Party has filed similar lawsuits challenging the overseas registration process for voters in North Carolina and Michigan, each considered "toss-up" states in the 2024 election, and where Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Trump are tied nearly neck-and-neck.
GOP plaintiffs argued in both states that the overseas voters do not meet the necessary criteria to register and vote in the election.
Asked for comment, Rep. Guy Reschenthaler, one of six Pennsylvania Republican plaintiffs, told Fox News that the case "is simple."
The Pennsylvania Department of State is "unlawfully diluting the rightful ballots of the brave men and women who serve our nation and their family members," he said in a statement. "Unelected career bureaucrats have no right to ignore federal laws that secure our elections."
"In the Navy JAG Corps, I made daily trips into the red zone in Baghdad, this is personal to me," he added. "I will always stand up for those in uniform who deserve to have their right to a secure election protected."
Houlahan dismissed the lawsuits in a statement of her own, however, describing them to Fox News as an "assault on the patriotism of the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and guardians who have taken an oath to defend and protect the United States," and on their spouses and families also living overseas.
SOLDIERS WERE FIRST: HOW AND WHY THE STATES STARTED AND NOW HANDLE EARLY AND ABSENTEE VOTING
"It is desperate, cynical, and unconstitutional to attempt to deprive American citizens – no matter where they live – of their right to vote and to have their votes counted," Houlahan said.
There are also important questions of standing in each of the cases.
Though federal law defers to individual states to establish their own election rules, the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, or UOCAVA, tasks the secretary of defense with implementing the registration and voting for U.S. service members and government employees living abroad.
The UOCAVA, passed in 1986, states that the voting process for Americans living overseas should not be "overly burdensome." It has also twice been significantly revised and modernized to improve the process of overseas voting, according to a Congressional Research Service report.
These changes were ordered in 2001, in response to controversy over the 2000 presidential election, including ballots cast by U.S. voters in Florida and overseas, and then in 2009, as a result of new efficiency standards included in the 2010 NDAA.
"While some of our colleagues are actively seeking to sow discord and misinformation, we urge you to carry out President Biden’s executive order and Federal Law to the best of your ability and ensure that all Americans have their constitutionally guaranteed right to participate in federal elections," the lawmakers told Austin in their letter.
It's unclear how the lawsuits will turn out, though a judge in Michigan said last week that the Republican plaintiffs waited too long to bring their claims before the court, noting that the court "shouldn’t be changing the rules for this election two-and-a-half weeks ahead of time."
North Carolina, for its part, will hear from Republicans this week.
