As election day looms, leftist groups appear to be adopting high-pressure tactics to get potential voters to the polls, sparking controversy and backlash. Among the groups at the center of the storm is the Voter Participation Center (VPC), a well-known voter registration organization that has faced significant criticism for using what some see as intimidation tactics to increase voter turnout.

The controversy recently erupted in Maryland, where the Attorney General’s office issued a cease-and-desist letter to the VPC after residents complained of receiving mailers described as “voting report cards.” These mailers reveal recipients’ voting records and suggest that their neighbors’ voting records will also be reviewed after the election, potentially putting pressure on them to vote. Attorney General Anthony Brown, a Democrat, condemned the mailers as a form of intimidation that could violate Maryland state law.

The mailers, which the VPC labels as part of a voter participation initiative, contain messages aimed at nudging recipients into action. They outline past voting behavior in the recipient’s household and make it clear that voting records will be checked again after the election. In one such example, the mailer reads: “We will be reviewing these records after the election to determine whether or not you joined your neighbors in voting.” While the VPC claims this message aims to encourage civic duty, critics argue that it serves as a subtle form of public shaming that makes voters feel obligated to participate or risk being “exposed.”

Maryland’s Attorney General was quick to push back on the VPC’s tactics, issuing a statement condemning the letters. “Voting is among the most important rights that Marylanders have,” Brown said in a press release. “Let me be clear: these unnerving letters are unacceptable, and Maryland voters should know that their decision to vote this Election Day is entirely theirs to make.” The statement went on to warn that the VPC’s mailers could amount to a legal violation, as state law prohibits intimidation, threats, or coercion aimed at influencing voters.

Maryland residents are not the only ones receiving these “voting report cards.” Similar messages have surfaced in other states, with reports from residents in states like Virginia, Alabama, and Michigan also receiving mailers from left-wing voter advocacy groups. Some of these mailers include pre-filled absentee ballot applications sent without voters’ requests, which have led officials to warn of potential fraud and privacy concerns.

In Fairfax County, Virginia, officials recently warned residents to be cautious of VPC’s mailings, which included absentee ballot applications addressed to the wrong jurisdiction. The county released a statement calling the mailers “inaccurate and potentially misleading,” advising residents to follow state guidelines to ensure their votes are counted correctly. Similar incidents have been reported in Alabama, where officials warned about unsolicited voter registration forms being sent to residents, leading to confusion and concern.

Organizations like the Capital Research Center (CRC) have long criticized the VPC and other activist groups for pushing the limits on voter outreach. Parker Thayer, a researcher at CRC, claims these tactics are a way for desperate groups to mobilize voters who might otherwise stay home on election day. According to Thayer, the VPC has been employing these tactics for over a decade and has faced accusations of using intimidation and public shaming to manipulate voting behavior.

“This particular bullying tactic to try and intimidate or bully people into voting has been incredibly popular this election cycle,” Thayer told reporters. “This is a tactic of desperation.” He also pointed to other left-leaning platforms, such as NowThis Impact, which has developed an online tool allowing users to check the voting records of friends and family members. NowThis Impact’s website, didmyfriendsvote.org, encourages users to look up voting history and, according to critics, subtly pressures individuals to confront those who haven’t voted.

One video on the site even demonstrates how users can “stalk the voting history” of acquaintances, which Thayer argues exemplifies the trend of aggressive tactics aimed at increasing voter turnout by any means necessary.

The Voter Participation Center was founded in 2003 and originally focused on mobilizing single women, a demographic that tends to lean Democratic. Over the years, the organization has expanded its efforts to target unmarried women, minorities, and millennials – voter groups that often lean Democratic. The group operates as a non-profit but has drawn heavy criticism for its ties to prominent Democratic organizations, including the Clinton Foundation and Democratic Party-affiliated groups.

The VPC’s methods have not only attracted complaints from conservative watchdogs but have also been challenged by local election officials, who argue that their mailings create confusion among voters and, at times, mislead them. In 2020, Fairfax County flagged the group’s unsolicited absentee ballot mailers as potentially misleading. The county warned that the applications sent by VPC were addressed to the wrong office, which could lead to errors in processing.

Thayer contends that these strategies are unlikely to change, as the VPC’s tactics have remained largely the same since 2008. “Those tactics work,” he said. “They’ve been using them since 2008. It’s been controversial the entire time they’ve done it. They’ve been asked to stop by secretaries of state, by left-wing journalists. They don’t stop, though.”

In Maryland, Attorney General Brown’s response indicates a serious stance on the issue of voter intimidation. The cease-and-desist letter requires the VPC to acknowledge compliance by the end of the business day. Failure to do so could result in fines or potential criminal charges, highlighting the state’s commitment to protecting voter privacy and autonomy.

According to Maryland law, voter intimidation – which includes attempts to coerce or influence voting decisions through “the use of force, fraud, threat, menace, intimidation, bribery, reward, or offer of reward” – is prohibited. The mailers, by suggesting potential public exposure of voters’ decisions to participate, appear to push the boundaries of this law.

For critics of leftist activist groups, these incidents are emblematic of a troubling trend where the right to vote is overshadowed by aggressive, and at times invasive, tactics that can discourage rather than encourage participation. Maryland’s response could mark a turning point in how these strategies are addressed by state and federal authorities.

The ongoing controversy surrounding the VPC’s mailers and similar efforts by other organizations raises a critical question about the line between encouraging civic participation and coercing it. Voting advocates argue that encouraging more Americans to vote is essential to a healthy democracy. However, using tactics that some interpret as intimidation risks eroding trust in the electoral process and could lead to legal consequences for organizations like the VPC.

As election day approaches, these debates highlight the importance of ensuring that voter outreach strategies respect individuals’ rights to vote freely – without fear of being shamed or pressured into action.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel