Voter ID Myths and other Fairy Tales

Email to a friend Permalink

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Clayton Williamson, Guest MINDSETTER™

Some years ago, Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D – NY) reminded us: “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” While Mr. Augustus’ piece is long on opinion, it is short on facts.

In his opening paragraph, Mr. Augustus asks us to guess “what the true motivation is of recent efforts by Republican lawmakers and tea party activists to install another barrier to voting.” While he posits a “new” barrier, he never mentions others. And, he never does tell us the motivation of those rascally Republicans and Tea Partiers. Moreover, there is little new about Voter ID laws since thirty-one states have implemented such requirements; 15 include picture ID’s and 16 include other forms of proof including signatures.

He goes on to suggest that since there is no “massive” voting fraud evident, that requiring an ID to vote is somehow not needed. And while I don’t know his definition of “massive”, I would point out that a single vote may swing an election. Just in the last year or so, we’ve seen several in the Worcester area that were won by single digits. So I would suggest that every vote is too important to be relegated to the “well there isn’t much fraud” pile. Perhaps there would be more reported fraud if officials actually looked for it. A few notable issues can be found with a two minute internet search:

• There is currently a case being prosecuted two hours east of Worcester in Troy, NY.

• A study by the Colorado secretary of state found that nearly http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/06/setting-the-record-straight-on-voter-id-laws/#ixzz1mUG68ySd">5,000 noncitizens voted in Colorado’s closely contested 2010 Senate race.

• According Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, after a photo ID law in 2008, the number of African-American voters has increased more than ten percent. Additionally, all voting demographics have grown at the rate of population growth. Moreover, prior to the passage, they investigated and penalized hundreds of people guilty of election and voter fraud every election cycle.

• An article in the in the Pittsburg Post-Gazette tells us that of 1.3 million new registrations ACORN turned in 2008, election officials rejected 400,000. Do you suppose they caught all of the bad ones?

• The same article on December 18, 2011 also tells us that the state chairman of Indiana's Democratic Party resigned Monday as a probe of election fraud in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary widened. It seems Indiana state law requires a presidential candidate to gather 500 valid signatures in each county to qualify for the ballot. Barack Obama may not have met it. Investigators think 150 of the 534 signatures the Obama campaign turned in for St. Joseph County may have been forged.

For more on the potential for fraud, I would refer Mr. Augustus to the most recent Pew Center Study on voter registration. A few “highlights” of the nationwide study:

• 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as active voters.
• Approximately 2.75 million voters have active registrations in more than one state.
• Approximately 12 million records have incorrect addresses.
• And in our City of Worcester, when the Worcester voter census was finally brought in compliance with state law in 2011, some 45% of voters were classified as “inactive”.

Perhaps in Mr. Augustus’ 20 plus years in the public sector, this data doesn’t look like a “problem waiting to happen”, but outside of the echo chamber of politics, it is grounds for a more proactive approach.

Mr. Augustus warns the reader to “Think about all the voters who don’t normally have government issued photo ID’s especially our elderly non-driving citizens.” OK, let’s do that. Let’s consider a few other instances where one is asked for some form of ID, often a driver’s license. Those in bold essentially will deny service without suitable ID(at least in MA):

• cashing checks
• opening a bank account
• boarding airline flights
• purchasing firearms/ammunition
• driving automobiles
• buying alcohol and tobacco products
• renting/buying property
• purchasing prescription and some non-prescription drugs
• applying for food stamps
• applying for welfare
• applying for a bank loan
• applying for a job
• using a credit/debit card

By now, the point should be obvious. There are a host of things in our everyday dealings that require one to produce a picture ID. In terms of frequency, voting is likely to be the least frequent need. So if this ID requirement is so burdensome, how do citizens without ID manage to live their lives?

And, if an ID is so burdensome, then Mr. Augustus must be surprised by the results of a recent Rasmussen poll that indicated 75% of total voters “believe voters should be required to show photo identification, such as a driver’s license, before being allowed to vote.” According to the poll, 85% of Republicans and 63% of Democrats support photo voter ID.

Mr. Augustus goes on to note “These voters would be forced at their expense and inconvenience, to have to go out and get a photo ID.” While he says this, he has no rationale for why it has to be at voter expense, or inconvenience. In fact, every state that has passed a voter ID law has also ensured that individuals who do not have a photo ID can easily obtain one for free if they cannot afford one. In fact, South Carolina’s ID law goes as far as to state that if a voter claims to have had a “reasonable impediment” to getting a photo ID, they can vote anyway. As for convenience, I would be astounded if the many organizations like Neighbor to Neighbor, the Affordable Housing Centers of America, and The League of Women voters wouldn’t help those in need. After all, voter registration and voter advocacy are what they are all about. I’m certain the local Tea Parties would pitch in as they have with property tax information. As for senior citizens, there also many senior advocate organizations that could make this happen conveniently at our Senior Centers and other similar venues.

Mr. Augustus also tells us: “There is no doubt that if such a law were passed thousands of long time voters would be turned away and not allowed to exercise their RIGHT to vote for not having complied with this new government burden.” I defy him to show any evidence of his conjecture. As noted earlier, the states with Voter ID requirements have arrangements for provisional ballots or other methods to insure no citizen’s voting franchise is impacted.

He goes on to mention the cost associated with issuing ID’s to those without them. The $20 million[over three years] that Missouri is estimating is based on something more than $4.22 per eligible voter. Exactly how this number is derived isn’t clear, but using eligible voters as the target base is simply idiotic. Roughly 10% of the voting age citizens are estimated to be without appropriate ID. A targeted campaign should cost far less than the $20 million if properly executed. And, if we need money to support the program in Massachusetts, perhaps we could find a way to use some of the more than $30 million that is used for healthcare of illegal immigrants. After all, wouldn’t Mr. Augustus rather spend money to insure the voting franchise of all our citizens is maintained?

Finally Mr. Augustus tells us why those rascally Republicans and Tea Partiers are pushing Voter ID laws. He says it is:“Because it is part of a political strategy to discourage some populations (particularly minority and younger voters) that have been voting for Democrats from turning out in large numbers. Instead of finding ways of appealing to these voters on the issues some have instead decided it would be easier to just make it harder for their voices to be heard.” I would encourage Mr. Augustus to provide any data or study from any state with Voter ID that proves his assertion. I know there are plenty of lawyers that would like to see it. So far, no court has overturned any Voter ID laws on Constitutional grounds. In fact, in 2008, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Indiana’s photo ID requirement when it ruled that states can require voters to produce photo identification without violating their constitutional rights. In arguing that voter fraud in close elections would dilute the valid votes of legitimate voters, sway close elections, and negatively impact voter confidence, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority that Indiana’s voter ID law is “amply justified by the valid interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.”

In his final paragraph, Mr. Augustus says: “Let’s be honest.” I couldn’t agree more. And I’m sure he really feels he is proposing the correct position. Unfortunately, it’s only a feeling that has nothing to do with the facts on the ground.

So what are the facts? 

• Of the states with Voter ID laws, voter turnout has not been adversely affected.
• Of the states with Voter ID laws, all have convenient provisions for voters without ID to protect their rights.
• Of the states with Voter ID laws, all provide free ID’s for those who need them.
• To protect the voters individual franchise is to protect the Constitution. That is something all of our elected officials have sworn to do. They need to get on with it.

 

Related Articles

• Augustus: Why Requiring an ID to Vote is a Bad Idea

Enjoy this post? Share it with others.

Email to a friend Permalink