A National Guard member works on election day at a polling location on April 7, 2020 in Madison, Wisconsin. Andy Manis / Getty Images.
ByJulia Baumel
The outbreak of COVID-19 across the U.S. has touched every facet of our society, and our democracy has been no exception.
<p>The pandemic poses unique challenges with respect to the 2020 election, and several states have already rescheduled spring primaries for the summer. State election officials are weighing not only the public health concerns of in-person voting but also the possibility of voter disenfranchisement for those who would inevitably choose to stay home. Uncertainty surrounding the duration of the outbreak also raises concerns about voter safety for the general election in November.</p><p>This issue brief from The New Center discusses various state decisions, the state-specific provisions governing the postponement of elections, implications for the general election, and how a combination of drastically expanding mail-in voting alongside in-person voting may offer the best option to conduct a fair, secure, and inclusive 2020 election.</p>
Which states have postponed their primaries?
<p>Since President Trump's declaration of a national emergency over the coronavirus on March 13, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, and West Virginia have <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/article/2020-campaign-primary-calendar-coronavirus.html" target="_blank">postponed their primaries</a>. Alaska, Hawaii, and Wyoming have replaced in-person primary voting with comprehensive mail-in systems. Ohio has postponed its primary and switched to a nearly all-mail election, with in-person voting allowed for people with disabilities and those without mailing addresses.</p><p>Despite the national emergency, three states, Arizona, Florida, and Illinois held their primaries on March 17 as scheduled. Wisconsin will hold its primary as scheduled on April 7, but on March 27, Governor Tony Evers requested that the state send <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/27/us/politics/wisconsin-primary-coronavirus.html" target="_blank">absentee ballots</a> to all 3.3 million voters—a task some state legislators and election clerks claim to be logistically <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/make-election-safe-wisconsin-gears-primary-amid-coronavirus/story?id=69879453" target="_blank">impossible</a> within such a short time frame. Several groups have filed lawsuits seeking to postpone the election and extend the deadline for absentee voting.</p>What legal provisions govern the postponement of a primary election?
<p>The process involved in delaying a primary election varies by state, and some states are better prepared than others to modify their elections in emergency situations. A handful of states have <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/election-emergencies.aspx" target="_blank">statutes</a> that allow for the postponement of an election in case of an emergency, and most of these statues grant unilateral decision making power to the governor.</p><p>Other states, such as Pennsylvania, do not have legislation on the books explicitly addressing election postponement. And <a href="https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/US/PDF/1937/0/0320..PDF" target="_blank">state law</a> sets Pennsylvania's primary election date for the fourth Tuesday in April in a presidential election year. Postponement of the Pennsylvania primary required the passage of a <a href="https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/billInfo/BillInfo.cfm?syear=2019&sind=0&body=S&type=B&bn=422" target="_blank">bill</a> to amend the election code, and this would also be the case for any other primary with a date set by law.</p><p>A similar lack of clear guidelines for postponing elections caused confusion in Ohio and shed light on the importance of emergency contingency plans. The Ohio Democratic primary was scheduled for Tuesday, March 17. On Monday the 16th, Governor Mike DeWine expressed his desire to delay the in-person election and extend absentee voting due to the coronavirus outbreak. Without the authority to unilaterally postpone an election, he promised to support a lawsuit asking the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas to exercise its power to do so. Judge Richard A. Frye <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ohio-seeks-postponement-of-tuesday-primary-as-coronavirus-fears-spread/2020/03/16/66a43cdc-67b5-11ea-b313-df458622c2cc_story.html" target="_blank">rejected</a> the lawsuit, claiming that the last-minute postponement would set a "terrible" precedent.</p><p>Shortly after, DeWine's chief health adviser declared a public health emergency and <a href="https://twitter.com/GovMikeDeWine/status/1239745738789306368" target="_blank">ordered</a> the polls to close. This prompted a lawsuit from the Ohio Democratic Party. "Nothing in Ohio law provides that Respondent Secretary has the power to set the date of Ohio's 2020 presidential primary election," says the <a href="http://supremecourt.ohio.gov/pdf_viewer/pdf_viewer.aspx?pdf=882617.pdf" target="_blank">lawsuit</a>. "Instead, the legal authority to set the date of Ohio's 2020 presidential primary election rests with the Ohio General Assembly." The Ohio Supreme Court denied this legal challenge. In addition to officially postponing the election to April 28, Ohio has also decided that the rescheduled primary will be conducted almost <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/25/ohio-vote-by-mail-primary-election-149012" target="_blank">exclusively by mail</a>.</p>If the outbreak extends through the fall, can the November general election be postponed?
<p>The general election could theoretically be postponed, but several obstacles make this scenario highly unlikely. <a href="https://www.loc.gov/law/help/statutes-at-large/28th-congress/session-2/c28s2ch1.pdf" target="_blank">The Presidential Election Day Act</a>, passed in 1845, sets Election Day as "the Tuesday next after the first Monday in the month of November." Therefore, postponing election day would require Congress to pass legislation that would be signed by the president and upheld in the courts.</p><p>In the unlikely case that this would happen, any flexibility in determining the length of the election delay would be limited by the Constitution. The <a href="https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendment/amendment-xx" target="_blank">20th Amendment</a> states that "The terms of the President and the Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January… of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin."</p>What about mail-in voting for the general election?
<p>While postponing the general election is effectively out of the question, voting by mail is one potential solution that could allow elections to continue while also prioritizing public health. While states do not have the power to change the date of their general elections, they do have broad jurisdiction to decide how to conduct them. Several states have expanded absentee voting options to some degree or adopted universal mail-in primaries, which can serve as "test runs" for expansive mail-in voting in the general election. And <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/all-mail-elections.aspx" target="_blank">five states</a>, Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, and Utah, automatically mail ballots to all registered voters for all elections. An additional <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/absentee-and-early-voting.aspx#do%20not" target="_blank">28 states</a> offer "no-excuse" absentee voting, which means voters may vote by mail for any reason if they request a ballot in advance. The remaining 17 states offer absentee voting to those with valid excuses. Voters with injuries or illnesses qualify, as do those who will be out of the country on election day.</p><p>For the states that do not automatically mail ballots to all voters, uncertainty surrounding the outbreak's timeline has led state and local election boards to mobilize in preparation for a surge in demand for general election absentee ballots. But some leaders have hesitated to support the changes that would be involved. Democrats have traditionally been eager proponents of expanded absentee voting, which Republicans have dismissed as partisan power grabs. However, evidence does not support the belief that mail-in voting offers an unfair advantage to Democrats. In the 2016 presidential election, the rates of mail-in voting for Democrats and Republicans were <a href="https://www.marketwatch.com/story/brace-for-more-voting-by-mail-because-of-coronavirus-and-other-logistical-challenges-facing-election-officials-2020-03-30" target="_blank">about the same</a>. If the coronavirus outbreak necessitates a nationwide move to mail-in voting, state election officials will have to weigh several logistical and substantive concerns:</p><p><u>Costs and Logistical Hurdles</u></p><p>The Brennan Center estimates that it would cost about $1.4 billion to implement nationwide mail-in voting for the general election. This estimate includes the cost of postage, ballot printing, and other equipment necessary for the transition. Maintaining in-person elections, bolstering online voter registration, and educating the public on these new measures would increase the overall cost of adequate general election preparation to about <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/estimated-costs-covid-19-election-resiliency-measures" target="_blank">$2 billion</a>. The $2 trillion coronavirus relief package includes a fraction of this estimated cost—<a href="https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/489435-senate-includes-400-million-for-mail-in-voting-in-coronavirus-spending" target="_blank">$400 million</a>—to help the states expand mail-in voting and make other election preparations.</p><p>Expanding mail-in voting <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/states-explore-more-vote-by-mail-options-to-cope-with-coronavirus-11585306800" target="_blank">cannot happen overnight</a>. States that wish to make significant changes to their voting systems have a short window of time to do so before the November elections. And the more ballots states need to mail, the more time they will typically need. They will also need to hire and train new workers, verify voter mailing addresses, print ballots, mail them well in advance of the voting deadline, use signature-matching technology to validate them once they return, build in time to rectify any issues that may arise with signature matching, and count the votes. It will be up to each state to balance public health, election security, and feasibility when determining how to prepare for the general election.</p>
<p><u>Voter Access</u></p><p>While mail-in voting facilitates participation for many, it creates barriers for others when it is the only option. Many voters are comfortable with the civic experience of casting a ballot at a local polling place and might choose not to vote at all if absentee voting is the only option. Postal delivery is less convenient for voters who live in certain rural areas or who rely on P.O. boxes that are not necessarily nearby. And many Native Americans on reservations <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/03/12/coronavirus-vote-by-mail-problems/" target="_blank">do not receive mail</a> at all. For non-English speakers, translated instructions on a mailed ballot might not be as useful as a bilingual poll worker who can answer specific questions in person.</p>
<p><u>Security Considerations</u></p><p>While voter fraud is <a href="https://newcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Securing-Our-Elections-6_compressed-1.pdf" target="_blank">rare</a>, mail-in voting is more prone to it than other voting methods. For example, "ballot harvesting" scandals involve the altering of absentee ballots by volunteers or other political operatives who are tasked with collecting and submitting these ballots on behalf of voters. States scrambling to expand their mail-in voting systems might be more prone to these issues than others with robust mail-in voting systems that have been developed over the course of several years.</p><p>Certain precautions can help prevent this type of fraud by making it more convenient for voters to deliver ballots on their own. Tammy Patrick, a former county election official who is now a senior adviser at the nonprofit Democracy Fund, suggests that states offer prepaid return postage, accept ballots postmarked as late as election day, and designate convenient drop-off locations for voters who prefer to deliver their ballots in person.</p><p>"If you do these things, no one needs to pick up your ballot—it's convenient for voters to maintain power and authority over their own ballot. Not doing these things risks a situation where a voter has waited until the last day, and someone shows up at their door offering to take their ballot and they see it as their last opportunity. That could be someone with good intentions or not," <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/voting-by-mail-would-reduce-coronavirus-transmission-but-it-has-other-risks" target="_blank">Patrick told ProPublica</a>.</p><p>Another security issue that could be amplified with the adoption of universal mail-in voting is voter coercion, which occurs when family members or others exert pressure on voters to vote a certain way. While all voters can be susceptible to coercion, absentee voters are especially prone—the kitchen table does not provide the same degree of freedom to vote independently as the voting booth does. But the same measures that would help prevent ballot tampering by making the process more seamless might also be useful in thwarting coercion efforts. For example, averting family scrutiny becomes easier when you have the option to return your ballot in a prepaid envelope and avoid having to provide postage from home.</p><p><span></span>Expansive mail-in voting systems and secure elections are not mutually exclusive as long as voters have plenty of options and privacy is prioritized. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mail-voting-could-secure-the-november-election-but-can-election-officials-make-it-happen-in-time/2020/03/20/9fedc2ea-69f1-11ea-b313-df458622c2cc_story.html" target="_blank">Colorado</a>, which has one of the most secure mail-in voting systems in the country, maintains the option to vote in-person. An in-person vote voids that voter's mailed ballot.</p>
Suggested Best Practices for States
<p>When it comes to elections, there is no one-size-fits-all reform that would work for all 50 states. Many states did make changes to their primaries that prioritize both the health of the public and the integrity of the election. Even without postponement as an option for the general election in November, states still have the opportunity to make meaningful changes if they act quickly. To the extent that it is feasible, each state should consider the possibility that the coronavirus outbreak will continue through the fall and make in-person voting too dangerous.</p><p><u>Expand mail-in voting options</u></p><p>States should mobilize to change their voting procedures in a way that offers mail-in voting to as many eligible voters as possible. States that currently require an excuse to vote absentee should eliminate these requirements and allow any voter to request an absentee ballot online. States that already offer "no-excuse" absentee voting should move in the direction of the few states that automatically send ballots to all eligible voters.</p>
<p><u>Enact measures to secure mail-in elections</u></p><p>States should work to implement identity verification measures, such as signature-matching technology, for their mail-in ballots while also planning to rectify inevitable technical issues that might incorrectly invalidate some ballots. To combat ballot tampering as well as the increased likelihood of voter coercion that expanded absentee voting can bring, states should enact precautionary measures that promote and facilitate ballot delivery by the voters themselves rather than a third party. These include offering prepaid postage, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/16/virus-means-well-be-voting-by-mail-that-wont-be-easy/" target="_blank">accepting ballots postmarked as late as election day</a>, and setting convenient drop-off locations for in-person delivery. Removing any opportunity for a third party to intercept the ballots or observe the votes of others can help preserve election integrity. Exceptions for elderly or disabled voters in need of assistance are often appropriate, but third-party assistance in these cases should require some extra form of authentication.</p>
<p><u>Maintain the option to vote in person</u></p><p>While states should encourage as much absentee voting as possible to protect the health of their voters and poll workers, they should also retain the option to vote in person to give everyone a fair chance to participate. While health concerns about crowds at the polls are valid, expanded absentee voting should reduce the number of voters who show up. To reduce crowds even further, states should consider adding new polling locations if possible. </p><p>Retaining an in-person voting option would expand voter access and serve as another layer of protection against fraud or coercion. With this option, a voter who is not satisfied with the absentee ballot they submitted can invalidate it by going to the polls on election day and casting a new one. A system of expanded mail-in voting alongside traditional, in-person voting is likely the best way to promote both public health and participation in the democratic process amid this unprecedented public health crisis.</p>
<p class=""><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://newcenter.org/coronavirus-voting-during-a-pandemic/?utm_source=TagAud&utm_campaign=ff61fe9d88-EMAIL_COVID2_TAG_2020_04_02&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_a0288f1c6c-ff61fe9d88-195659419" target="_blank">The New Center</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Climate Change Is a Top Concern in 2020 Election - EcoWatch ›
- 'How Dare You Put Our Lives at Risk': Pennsylvania Democrat Brian Sims Rips GOP Members for 'Coverup' of Positive COVID-19 Tests ›
- Voting Is Now a Public Health Issue ›
- Covering the 2020 Elections as a Climate Story ›
- The Americans With Disabilities Act at 30: A Cause for Celebration During COVID-19? - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Pexels
By Andrew Joseph Pegoda
At least 40 percent to 90 percent of American voters stay home during elections, evidence that low voter turnout for both national and local elections is a serious problem throughout the U.S.
<p>
With the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/2020-election">2020 presidential election</a> approaching, <a href="https://www.thedailytimes.com/news/league-of-women-voters-to-host-brainstorming-event-on-how/article_8fb65ee3-7051-5efa-a958-5661ce4b07b5.html" target="_blank">directives for people to "get out and vote"</a> will be firing up again.
</p><p>
Some people might be indifferent or simply not care, but many who forgo voting have legitimate reasons.
</p><p>
Over the past decade, through my <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=RRyCesgAAAAJ&hl=en" target="_blank">extensive</a> <a href="https://andrewpegoda.com/cv/" target="_blank">research</a> on civil rights and oppression, through my observations of social media comments and through my conversations with hundreds of college students, I have concluded that such reasons are both important and, generally, unnoticed.
</p>
<p>
<em>Reposted with permission from </em><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/i-asked-people-why-they-dont-vote-and-this-is-what-they-told-me-129421" target="_blank">The Conversation</a></em><em>.</em>
</p><script async="async" data-counter="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/129421/count?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" id="theconversation_tracker_hook" src="https://theconversation.com/javascripts/lib/content_tracker_hook.js" type="text/javascript"></script>
1. Voter Suppression
<p><a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/10/23/659784277/republican-voter-suppression-efforts-are-targeting-minorities-journalist-says" target="_blank">Republican-led efforts</a> to diminish participation in voting and voter registration have greatly contributed to the number of nonvoters.</p><p>Since 2010, <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id.aspx" target="_blank">25 states</a> have adopted measures specifically aimed at making voting more difficult. Such measures include additional <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id.aspx" target="_blank">voter identification</a> requirements.</p><p>Sometimes lawmakers said these were necessary to curb illegal voting, which research shows is an <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/18/us/voter-fraud.html" target="_blank">all-but-nonexistent</a> <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/04/22/714950127/after-democrats-surged-in-2018-republican-run-states-eye-new-curbs-on-voting" target="_blank">problem</a>.</p><p>Some counties and states have also created confusion and uncertainty about <a href="https://www.texastribune.org/2020/01/06/texas-and-national-democrats-suing-state-over-voter-registration/" target="_blank">how to initially register</a> or <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/voter-id-election-confusion" target="_blank">re-register</a> after a voter has moved.</p><p>In other cases, people might not know where to vote, due to the distribution of <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/05/us/politics/misinformation-election-day.html" target="_blank">deliberately false information</a>.</p><p>Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/shelby-county-v-holder/" target="_blank">Shelby County v. Holder</a> in 2013 that key aspects of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were unconstitutional, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-locations/southern-us-states-have-closed-1200-polling-places-in-recent-years-rights-group-idUSKCN1VV09J" target="_blank">states have closed</a> more than 1,000 polling locations, half of these in <a href="https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/politics/texas/article/Texas-has-closed-more-polling-places-than-any-14429443.php#" target="_blank">Texas</a>.</p>2. Personal Choice
<p>Some people decide to forgo voting.</p><p>I hear again and again that sometimes people make such choices because they were intimidated by friends, by family members or by people at <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/reports-of-voter-intimidation-at-polling-places-in-texas" target="_blank">polling places</a>.</p><p>When facing the complexities of races with dozens of candidates and complicated issues, <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/05/in-their-own-words-why-some-people-find-voting-difficult/" target="_blank">others say they don't feel</a> they know enough to make informed decisions.</p><p>People have also told me they worry about feeling personally responsible if they vote for a candidate or position and there are unforeseen consequences, such as cuts to important aid programs. Members of any group, but especially those of <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/01/why-are-the-poor-and-minorities-less-likely-to-vote/282896/" target="_blank">underrepresented</a> <a href="https://medium.com/s/story/an-open-letter-to-everyone-who-wont-stop-telling-me-to-vote-21b75e28546b" target="_blank">groups</a>, may long to vote for desirable candidates but not feel that current candidates offer the possibility that anything will really change.</p><p>Individuals have shared with me that they have not voted because they do not trust a nation that they feel has lied and perpetuated systemic abuse against minorities, aggravated further by <a href="https://www.apa.org/monitor/2018/03/jn" target="_blank">widespread</a> <a href="https://harvardpress.typepad.com/hup_publicity/2018/07/why-gerrymandering-matters-allan-lichtman.html" target="_blank">gerrymandering</a> and for presidential elections, by an <a href="https://theconversation.com/whose-votes-count-the-least-in-the-electoral-college-74280" target="_blank">Electoral College</a> system that doesn't weigh each vote the same.</p><p>In <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/08/europe/french-voters-spoiled-ballots-abstained/index.html" target="_blank">France</a> and <a href="https://www.indiatoday.in/fyi/story/nota-none-of-the-above-assembly-elections-2016-west-bengal-assam-kerala-311814-2016-03-04" target="_blank">India</a>, for example, people who dislike all of the candidates can formally "vote" without endorsing any candidate by selecting "none of the above." Not having this option in the U.S. might affect turnout, too.</p>3. Obstacles to Access
<p>For others, voting may simply be too difficult.</p><p>I often hear of people who — even with early voting or absentee options — cannot vote because they <a href="https://money.cnn.com/2015/08/05/news/economy/poor-people-voting-rights/index.html" target="_blank">lack transportation</a>. They are homeless. They lack child care. They are <a href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2018/02/01/how-voters-with-disabilities-are-blocked-from-the-ballot-box" target="_blank">disabled</a>. They <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/11/12/a-ton-of-people-didnt-vote-because-they-couldnt-get-time-off-from-work/" target="_blank">work, go to school and live in different cities</a>.</p><p>This is even more applicable for the <a href="https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2019/demo/P70BR-163.pdf" target="_blank">7 to 8 million</a> in the U.S. who hold multiple jobs. <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/can-i-leave-work-early-to-vote-2016-11" target="_blank">Laws guarantee</a> <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/1/18016220/2018-midterm-elections-time-off-work-vote" target="_blank">time off</a> <a href="https://aflcio.org/2016/11/5/know-your-rights-state-laws-employee-time-vote" target="_blank">for voting</a> but <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/1/18016220/2018-midterm-elections-time-off-work-vote" target="_blank">aren't enforceable and aren't always workable</a>.</p><p>Such people are effectively disenfranchised.</p>4. Lack of Rights
<p><span>Only non-incarcerated, mentally competent, registered citizens of age can vote.</span></p><p>Based on 2015 data, the right to vote was not extended to a more than <a href="https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/lpr_population_estimates_january_2015.pdf" target="_blank">13 million</a> people with green cards, work visas or refugee status. Given the total population of people 18 and older exceeded <a href="https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk" target="_blank">248 million</a> in 2015, one out of every 20 adults living, working and spending money in the U.S. was not eligible to vote.</p><p>Using <a href="https://doi.org/10.29158/JAAPL.003780-18" target="_blank">vague and inconsistent</a> language, states have also worked to <a href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2018/03/21/thousands-lose-right-to-vote-under-incompetence-laws" target="_blank">deny</a> <a href="https://www.npr.org/2016/09/04/492430780/disabled-and-fighting-for-the-right-to-vote" target="_blank">disabled</a> or <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/disabled-people-denied-voting-rights-group-says" target="_blank">mentally</a> <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/10/keeping-the-mentally-incompetent-from-voting/263748/" target="_blank">ill</a> people a political voice. This affects <a href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2018/03/21/thousands-lose-right-to-vote-under-incompetence-laws" target="_blank">potentially over a million people nationwide</a>.</p><p>As discussed in the books <a href="http://newjimcrow.com/" target="_blank"><em data-redactor-tag="em" data-verified="redactor">The New Jim Crow</em></a> and in <a href="https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/race-incarceration-and-american-values" target="_blank"><em data-redactor-tag="em" data-verified="redactor">Race, Incarceration and American Values</em>,</a> an additional 6 million Americans <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/21/us/felony-voting-rights-law.html" target="_blank">cannot vote</a> because of felony convictions, an issue that disproportionately affects <a href="https://news.uga.edu/total-us-population-with-felony-convictions/" target="_blank">black people</a>. In some states, this disenfranchisement remains <a href="https://apnews.com/07409d1e264549f093a554b38ccd82f3" target="_blank">in effect for life</a>.</p>The Future
<p>Given the legitimacy of reasons why they don't participate, nonvoters certainly shouldn't be scolded with, "If you <a href="http://www.msnbc.com/martin-bashir/memo-americans-if-you-dont-vote-you-can/amp" target="_blank">don't</a> <a href="https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-say-if-you-dont-vote-you-cant-complain" target="_blank">vote</a>, you <a href="https://link.medium.com/jtQbGeVE32" target="_blank">can't</a> <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dont-vote-dont-complain_b_12254884" target="_blank">complain</a>." Or with even harsher words, as one friend on Facebook put it: "If you don't vote, everything wrong in the world is your fault."</p><p>People long to be heard and deserve fair representation. Instead of bashing nonvoters, I recommend taking some deep breaths and initiating friendly conversations. Listen and learn. At a time when public trust in government is at <a href="https://www.people-press.org/2019/04/11/public-trust-in-government-1958-2019/" target="_blank">historic lows</a>, such conversations might even encourage someone to demand a voice.</p>From Your Site Articles
- Big Data, Big Oil and White Supremacy: Unveiling the Dark Forces ... ›
- Democratic Candidates Face off on Climate in the Last Debate ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Displaced voters walk through debris to vote in a new polling location after their regular polling place was damaged by Hurricane Michael at Shell Point Beach in Wakulla Country, Florida on November 6, 2018.
Mark Wallheiser / Getty Images
The climate crisis is a major concern for American voters with nearly 40 percent reporting the issue will help determine how they cast their ballots in the upcoming 2020 presidential election, according to a report compiled by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.
Of more than 1,000 registered voters surveyed on global warming, climate and energy policies, as well as personal and collective action, 38 percent said that a candidate's position on climate change is "very important" when it comes to determining who will win their vote. Overall, democratic candidates are under more pressure to provide green solutions as part of their campaign promises with 64 percent of Democrat voters saying they prioritize the issue compared with just 34 percent of Independents and 12 percent of Republicans.
<div id="46182" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="FSRT7G1568219147"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1131628622987636736" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">How important is global warming to voters in the 2020 presidential campaign? https://t.co/Eso27YnhOv https://t.co/nRvT6PIu81</div> — Yale Program on Climate Change Communication (@Yale Program on Climate Change Communication)<a href="https://twitter.com/YaleClimateComm/statuses/1131628622987636736">1558636263.0</a></blockquote></div><p>The climate crisis has become a driving and dividing factor in the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/politics/">political</a> arena in recent years. According to the survey, almost three-quarters of respondents think global warming is happening (though that number varies across party lines) with more than half of registered voters agreeing that it is driven by human activities. As such, six-in-ten voters are worried about the current state of the climate — a marked increase from the last survey conducted in March 2018.</p>
<p>When asked how much they would support different strategies the government could use to reduce <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/air-pollution">air pollution</a>, more than three-quarters agreed that investing in renewable energy research and infrastructure and regulating pollution was a priority, as well as <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/carbon-tax">taxing</a> pollution (requiring companies to pay a tax on pollution they emit to encourage a reduction in emissions). A majority of respondents also support more specific policies to reduce carbon pollution and promote clean energy, including a revenue-neutral carbon tax and a fee on carbon pollution that distributes money to U.S. citizens through monthly dividend checks. Furthermore, many support a Clean Power Plan that implements strict carbon dioxide emission limits on existing coal-fired power plants. A majority of voters also say they want policies that address the pollution that causes global warming and reduces pollution investments, regulations and taxes. </p>
<p>Climate change ranks as the 17th most important voting issue and is a more polarizing topic than <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/21/climate-crisis-more-politically-polarizing-than-abortion-for-us-voters-study-finds" target="_blank">abortion</a>. So much so, that almost half of registered voters say they would support a president who declared global warming a national emergency if Congress does not act.</p>
<p>A handful of 2020 presidential candidates have put climate change at the forefront of their campaign platform as part of ongoing pressure to combat the effects of climate change. The <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/green-new-deal-ocasio-cortez-2628265318.html" target="_self">Green New Deal</a>, unveiled in part by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) earlier this year is a decade-long plan that will "mobilize every aspect of American society ... to achieve net-zero <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/greenhouse-gases" target="_self">greenhouse gas</a> emissions and create economic prosperity for all," according to a section of the resolution from her office <a href="https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=5729035-Green-New-Deal-FAQ" target="_blank">posted by NPR</a>.</p>
<p>Colorado Senator <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/michael-bennet-climate-change-fund-2637723785.html" target="_self">Michael Bennet</a>, who introduced a plan just a few days ago to combat climate change. In it, Bennet calls for the establishment of a "Climate Bank" to use federal spending to incentivize the private sector to transition to net-zero emissions by 2050. His opponent, Governor Jay Inslee of Washington State, similarly announced a clean energy plan earlier this month dubbed the "<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/gov-inslee-climate-plan-2636412112.html" target="_self">100 Percent Clean Energy</a> for America Plan" that would aim to phase out coal over the next decade and require all power production to be emissions-free by 2035. </p>
<p>Former Vice President <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/2020-joe-biden-climate-2635600061.html?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1" target="_self">Joe Biden</a> also threw his name into the running hat but didn't mention climate change in his announcement. His overall stand on the Green New Deal and fossil fuel infrastructure is hazy. His campaign website promises environmental action but does not go into further detail. If elected president, Senator Elizabeth Warren has <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/elizabeth-warren-2020-campaign-2634790430.html" target="_self">promised</a> an executive order to ban new fossil fuel extraction leases in federal lands and waters.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Covering the 2020 Elections as a Climate Story ›
- The Next Election Is About the Next 10,000 Years ›
- U.S. Voters Increasingly Concerned About Climate Crisis - EcoWatch ›
- Guardian/Vice Poll Finds Most 2020 Voters Favor Climate Action - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Support Ecowatch
Dena Cooper / Ikon Images / Getty Images
With the midterms rapidly approaching, it's important to make your vote count in the most pressing issue of our time: climate change.
After a year of destructive hurricanes, killer flooding and devastating wildfires, 2018 is already on pace to be among the hottest years in recorded history. Earlier this month, top scientists urged drastic emissions cuts in order to avoid climate catastrophe. Meanwhile, we have lawmakers in office who are not taking these threats very seriously, deny the science, and encourage the use of planet-warming fossil fuels.
<p>
For all these reasons and more, Nov. 6, 2018 will be one of the most important elections yet. That's why <a href="http://genprogress.org/" target="_blank">Generation Progress</a> and <a href="http://theyearsproject.com/" target="_blank">The Years Project</a> have launched the <a href="http://beaclimatevoter.org/" target="_blank">Be a Climate Voter</a> campaign to motivate Americans—especially the country's youngest voters—to head to the polls.
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="0668d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="93WFPM1576683789"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1054803151621144576" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The election is just around the corner and this year, the world's biggest polluters are counting on you.… https://t.co/QQyMV74l5Q</div> — The YEARS Project (@The YEARS Project)<a href="https://twitter.com/YEARSofLIVING/statuses/1054803151621144576">1540319643.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>
A recent <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/public-backs-action-global-warming-cost-concerns-muted/story?id=56549874" target="_blank">ABC News</a> poll found that most Americans believe the government should take action on global warming. Unsurprisingly, the generation growing up with the climate crisis and the ones who will have to deal with its worst effects after all the older voters are gone think the country should be doing more to fight global warming.
</p><p>
"Support for substantial government action ranges from 70 percent of those 18-39 to 54 percent of those 50-plus," the poll says. "Young people also are much more confident in such action, 71 vs. 48 percent; and more apt to see serious risks to the United States if it's not taken, 61 vs. 44 percent."
</p><p>
<span></span>Kilan Bishop, a 26-year-old PhD student, has seen first-hand how <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/affordable-housing-crisis-miami-2600421067.html">flooding has adversely affected</a> her community in Miami, Florida and will be voting with environmental justice in mind when she casts her ballot.
</p><p>
"Climate change used to feel like this big overwhelming threat, but this year I found something I can do about it—I'm a climate voter," she says in a Be a Climate Voter campaign video.
</p><p>
Thursday, Oct. 24, EcoWatch will host a Facebook Live at 12 p.m. EST featuring Bishop, who will share her experiences on the front-lines of climate change and highlight the importance of the youth vote. Join us on our <a href="https://www.facebook.com/EcoWatch/" target="_blank">Facebook home page</a>.</p><p>
If you care about clean air, water and preserving our precious natural resources we urge you to join the movement. Use the hashtag #ClimateVoter on Oct. 24 to share why you'll be voting with the planet in mind.
</p><ul class="ee-ul">
</ul><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube">
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="336c00110555e70fe878293e577c7da7"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xM0AxkvvCew?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
</p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
Sierra Club Alerts Voters to Top 10 'Fossil Fools' to Oust in Midterm Elections
26 September 2018
Politics
With the U.S. midterm elections just six weeks away, the Sierra Club launched a campaign Tuesday to boot ten leading "Fossil Fools" from office and replace them with more environmentally friendly alternatives.
The "Fossil Fools 2018" campaign, spearheaded by the group's Political Committee, targets Congressional Republicans running for reelection in November who have consistently voted in favor of fossil fuel interests and against taking action on climate change and protecting air and water.
<p>"The Fossil Fools in Congress vote day in and day out with corporate polluters instead of their constituents, allowing polluters to defile clean air and water with impunity while ignoring the climate crisis," Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said in a <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2018/09/midterms-18-who-are-fossil-fools-congress-aggressive-sierra-club-political" target="_blank">press release</a>. "Fortunately, voters have an opportunity to vote out the Fossil Fools in November and elect leaders who will boldly rewrite the rules of the economy so it works for our families, the middle class and our kids again."</p><p>The Sierra Club said the top offenders were Texas Senator Ted Cruz, Nevada Senator Dean Heller and Florida Governor Rick Scott, who is running to represent Florida in the Senate against Democrat Bill Nelson.</p><p>Cruz has a three percent environmental voting record and has taken $2,901,632 from oil and gas companies, according to the <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2018/09/ted-cruz-named-top-fossil-fool-2018-election-sierra-club-political-committee" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a>. <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2018/09/dean-heller-named-top-fossil-fool-2018-election-sierra-club-political" target="_blank">Heller</a> has a voting record of 11 percent on the environment and has taken $577,300 from oil and gas interests and $518,926 from <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/coal" target="_self">coal</a> mining interests.</p><p>Cruz and Scott are also infamous <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-denier">climate change deniers</a>. Cruz has called climate science a "religion," <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/fossil-fools-sierra-club-midterms_us_5ba9c509e4b0375f8f9ff19f" target="_blank">The Huffington Post said</a>, and Florida's Department of Environmental Protection <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/florida-officials-banned-from-using-the-terms-climate-change-and-susta-1882018265.html" target="_self">was banned</a> from using the terms "climate change" and "global warming" during Scott's tenure as governor.</p><p>In the House of Representatives, the Sierra Club is targeting Barbara Comstock (VA-10), Dana Rohrabacher (CA-48), Tom McClintock (CA-04), Steve Knight (CA-25), David Brat (VA-07), Mike Coffman (CO-06) and Peter Roskam (IL-06).</p><p>"Each of our Fossil Fools has earned that title," Brune told The Huffington Post. </p><p>Brune explained the stakes of the campaign to The Huffington Post: the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/donald-trump" target="_blank">Trump</a> administration is hostile to environmental action and is actively working to roll back Obama-era protections, and the Republican-controlled legislature merely enables this behavior.</p><p>"Everything we've worked [for] for decades is under assault by this administration, there is no check and no accountability coming from Congress," Brune said.</p><p>The campaign has started out with three video ads and will announce additional targeted ad campaigns as November approaches. </p><p>The campaign will be pushed on social media and via the purchase of digital ads in the "Fossil Fool's" districts. </p><p>"Our aggressive national ad campaign will let voters in key states and districts know that their members of Congress are Fossil Fools who will do anything to help polluters instead of their constituents" Sierra Club National Political Director Ariel Hayes said in the press release. "There's more to come, so stay tuned as the 2018 midterms approach."</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="3cc8b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="XCUM331576663348"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="968912554251685888" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Republicans in Congress Flunk Environment and Public Health Report Card With Average Grade of 1%… https://t.co/DOaMpytW9a</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/968912554251685888">1519841729.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
L: Michael Coghlan / Flickr R: Coloured chest X-ray of a male patient showing evidence of a mesothelioma lung cancer, which is usually associated with exposure to asbestos. Zephyr / Science Photo Library / Getty Images
The Environmental Working Group Action Fund, the political arm of the Environmental Working Group (EWG), released a first-ever report that scores how each member of the U.S. House of Representatives voted on chemical policy and safety.
The scorecard shows that 140 House members voted against chemical safeguards every time, while 149 members consistently voted for chemical safety protections.
<p style="">
"While no president has ever done as much to weaken safeguards for toxic chemicals as
<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/trump">Donald Trump</a>, too many members of Congress have collaborated with the Trump administration or cast votes in favor of policies that reversed or delayed chemical bans, gutted chemical safety rules, rejected sound science, weakened worker and consumer protections, and denied justice to asbestos victims," the <a href="https://www.ewgaction.org/protectyourhealth/toxiccomrades.html" target="_blank">report</a> said.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="63690" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="GKLI201576683798"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="996391819305861120" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">#Trump Admin. Blocked Toxic Chemicals Study Fearing 'Public Relations Nightmare': EcoWatch https://t.co/gyyl1WYE2W</div> — EcoInternet (@EcoInternet)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoInternetDrGB/statuses/996391819305861120">1526393296.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p style="">The report specifically focused on
<a href="https://www.ewgaction.org/protectyourhealth/billsummaries.html" target="_blank">17 bills and amendments</a> that were up for a vote during the 115th and 114th Congresses.<br></p><p style="">
The EWG Action Fund also <a href="https://www.ewgaction.org/protectyourhealth/toxiccomrades.html" target="_blank">singled out</a> several lawmakers, including Rep. Jason Lewis (R-Minn.), Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas), Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.), Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas), Rep. Jason Smith (R-Mo.) and Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-Calif.), who the action fund says introduced or co-sponsored measures that weaken existing chemical safety laws.</p><div id="0fcef" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="KY5PHG1576683799"><blockquote class="instagram-media" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-version="4" style=" background:#FFF; border:0;
border-radius:3px; box-shadow:0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15);
margin: 1px; max-width:658px; padding:0; width:99.375%; width:-webkit-calc(100% - 2px);
width:calc(100% - 2px);">
<div style="padding:8px;">
<div style=" background:#F8F8F8; line-height:0; margin-top:40px; padding:50% 0; text-align:center;
width:100%;">
<div style=" background:url();
display:block; height:44px; margin:0 auto -44px; position:relative; top:-22px; width:44px;">
</div></div><p style=" margin:8px 0 0 0; padding:0 4px;">
<a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/BUS8nLOBLer/" style=" color:#000; font-family:Arial,sans-serif;
font-size:14px; font-style:normal; font-weight:normal; line-height:17px; text-decoration:none;
word-wrap:break-word;" target="_top">@aguawater1394 on Instagram: “Resist! Organize! Vote! #beatjason2018 #beatjason #repjasonlewis #resist #saveobamacare #mn02 #mndfl #minnesota #minnesotadfl #politics…”</a></p>
</div></blockquote></div><p style="">"Over and over, too many legislators voted to support President Trump's agenda to eliminate toxic chemical safeguards," said Scott Faber, speaking on behalf of EWG Action Fund, in a statement received by EcoWatch.<br></p><p>
<span></span>"Too many members of Congress have collaborated with the Trump administration to advance policies that reject sound science and weaken worker and consumer protections," Faber added. "And many more stood by silently when Trump's EPA reversed or delayed chemical bans or gutted chemical safety rules."
</p><p style="">
Most Republican members of Congress were graded poorly in the report. However, the action fund praised the lawmakers that bucked their party to vote for chemical safety, including Reps. Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.), John Duncan (R-Tenn.), Walter Jones (R-N.C.) and others who
<a href="http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2017/roll148.xml" target="_blank">voted</a> to protect asbestos victims.</p><div id="dd89d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="DZ528S1576683799"><blockquote class="instagram-media" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-version="4" style=" background:#FFF; border:0;
border-radius:3px; box-shadow:0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15);
margin: 1px; max-width:658px; padding:0; width:99.375%; width:-webkit-calc(100% - 2px);
width:calc(100% - 2px);">
<div style="padding:8px;">
<div style=" background:#F8F8F8; line-height:0; margin-top:40px; padding:50% 0; text-align:center;
width:100%;">
<div style=" background:url();
display:block; height:44px; margin:0 auto -44px; position:relative; top:-22px; width:44px;">
</div></div><p style=" margin:8px 0 0 0; padding:0 4px;">
<a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/BlbH9gpHFpp/" style=" color:#000; font-family:Arial,sans-serif;
font-size:14px; font-style:normal; font-weight:normal; line-height:17px; text-decoration:none;
word-wrap:break-word;" target="_top">CBS Los Angeles on Instagram: “WATCH: A steam pipe explodes in Manhattan's Flatiron district, rupturing pavement and spewing smoke and debris that authorities believe may…”</a></p>
</div></blockquote></div><p style="">The action fund also noted that Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) voted for funding chemical reviews and against a farm bill that included pesticide safety loopholes. Florida Reps. Carlos Curbelo and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen voted against efforts to weaken agency science, and Illinois Republican Rep. Rodney Davis voted against toxic <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/air-pollution">air pollution</a> loopholes.<br></p>
From Your Site Articles
- Russian Asbestos Company Makes Trump Its Poster Boy ›
- Why Asbestos Is Still a Major Public Health Threat in the U.S. ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Leonardo DiCaprio: 'Vote For Leaders Who Understand the Science and Urgency of Climate Change'
29 July 2016
Climate
For environmental activist Leonardo DiCaprio, it is very clear why you can not stay home this Nov. 8. Following 14 consecutive months of record-high temperatures, the United Nations declared last week that 2016 is officially going to be the hottest year ever.
The alarming report prompted the Oscar-winning actor to send out this tweet encouraging his followers to flex their civic duty:
Another reminder of why it’s so important to get out there and vote this year. https://t.co/7YnbbgWqgl— Leonardo DiCaprio (@Leonardo DiCaprio)1469725437.0
He further dove into this important political topic on his Instagram page.
"It's time to vote for leaders in every community who understand the science and urgency of climate change," the post states. "Take a stand and vote."
The post included a photo of the Riau Rainforest in Indonesia being cleared for a palm oil operations, which is a major driver of deforestation that releases greenhouse gases and leads to biodiversity loss.
While he hasn't explicitly said so, DiCaprio has virtually endorsed Hillary Clinton, who's now officially the Democratic presidential nominee. The Hollywood A-lister has donated at least $2,700 to her campaign and he has also supported past presidential campaigns for John Kerry and Barack Obama.
“I believe in science. I believe that #climatechange is real…” –@HillaryClinton The time is now. Vote.— Leonardo DiCaprio (@Leonardo DiCaprio)1469808062.0
DiCaprio also had glowing words to say about Clinton's Democratic presidential rival, Bernie Sanders, especially for his environmental bonafides.
"Look, not to get political, but listening to Bernie Sanders at that first presidential debate was pretty inspiring—to hear what he said about the environment," DiCaprio told Wired in December. "Who knows which candidate is going to become our next president, but we need to create a dialogue about it. I mean, when they asked each of the candidates what the most important issue facing our planet is, Bernie Sanders simply said climate change. To me that's inspiring."
Meanwhile, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump believes that global warming is a hoax. A vote for Trump would essentially be a vote for dirty energy, continued dismissal of science and, as Stephen Hawking noted, a more dangerous world. If elected president, Trump would be the only world leader who does not acknowledge the dangers and science of climate change.
Last night, accepting her nomination for president, Clinton said she is "proud" of the Paris climate agreement and pledged to hold every country accountable to their commitments to climate action, including the U.S. One of her best lines, which was met with loud cheers and applause, was a clear poke at Trump and other climate deniers: "I believe in science."
DiCaprio is a longtime environmental champion. His eponymous foundation recently held its third annual fundraising gala in St. Tropez, France, setting a new fundraising record of $45 million that will go towards preserving Earth and its inhabitants.
"While we are the first generation that has the technology, the scientific knowledge and the global will to build a truly sustainable economic future for all of humanity—we are the last generation that has a chance to stop climate change before it is too late," DiCaprio said in a speech at the gala.
DiCaprio celebrated Thursday on Instagram a major victory of one of his foundation's partners, the Wildlife Direct and Elephant Crisis Fund in Kenya.
Last week, Feisal Mohamed Ali—a notorious illegal ivory kingpin—was sentenced 20 years in jail and fined 20 million shillings ($200,000) by a Kenyan court.