blog.MOCHEEKS.com

In response to recent Voter ID brouhaha in Wisconsin, this question has been presented to me by several of my friends of varying political opinions. Thus I have been repeating conversations about the proposed Voter ID bill quite a bit recently. When I started typing my thoughts out to comment on a friend’s Facebook wall, I realized I had more to say than was probably polite to put on someone’s wall. Hence this lengthy blog post. —-

Some people are just of the belief that voting for our elected officials is among the most important things that citizens can do to participate in their government. Likewise, some people are in favor of encouraging everyone to vote (regardless of political outcome) in an effort to achieve the most sincerely “representative” government possible. Obviously the effort to increase voter turnout is best served by removing as many barriers as possible for eligible voters to participate in the process. I share this view, and this is what motivates me to work on VoteSimple.org. VoteSimple is non-partisan a text message based service that assists eligible Wisconsin voters to learn when, where, and how to vote.

On first glance though, the majority of people have no objection to Voter ID laws. Frankly it is a cultural norm to show an ID to do plenty of things in daily life in America, and doing so present little inconvenience to most people. The conversation gets interesting only once one takes a look at who it is that Voter ID laws do actually inconvenience. Then we can begin to understand the underlying motives behind Voter ID laws and why they are the subject of such partisan divide amongst legislators.

First lets start with: What motivates Wisconsin’s Voter ID bill?

Surely there must be evidence to suggest that requiring an approved Photo ID at the polling place will allow us to have more faith in our elections. Or at least make it so that our elections are less subject to fraudulent votes by people who are ineligible to vote, or are voting on behalf of someone else and things of that nature.

Well… The spokesperson for Wisconsin’s Government Accountability Board says that, “Our experience has been that there are relatively few cases of voter fraud in Wisconsin.”

But voting accuracy is an extremely important issue… so what does “relatively few cases” mean? A survey by the GAB of the state’s district attorneys following the November 2008 presidential election found there were 63 fraud complaints. Seven of those 63 were substantiated. [source]

So of ~2.9 million votes, the GAB (which was created in 2007 to ensure elections are occurring with integrity) discovered that there was a potential for concern regarding the authenticity of approximately 0.002% of votes in 2008. Similarly, in 2004 The League of Women Voters reported that there were 18 fraudulent votes out of 3 million. So while one fraudulent vote is one too many, Wisconsin can be proud of itself for being overall an extremely honest state as it relates to voting.

This bears restating the original question… If the GAB has evidence of “relatively few cases”, then what is it that makes imposing a strict Voter ID law (that will cost the state $7.5M) so compelling to so many of our currently elected officials?

Now we are back to the issue of: Who does this Voter ID law actually inconvenience?

Many people are quick to suggest that most everyone surely has an ID because it is necessary to travel, or buy things, or make bank transactions, or buy cold medicine, etc. It is simply not the case that everyone has an state issued picture ID. Additionally, almost none of these example situations are hindered by having an out-of-date ID in the way that voting will now be restricted.

From a research report by the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Employment and Training Institute on The Driver License Status of the Voting Age Population in Wisconsin:

The statewide breakdown of those who do not have a valid drivers license that reflects their present address (and thus will have more work to do if they want to continue, or start, voting in Wisconsin) is as follows:

46% of Hispanic males
59% of Hispanic females
55% of African American males
49% of African American females
17% of white males
17% of white females

The same report goes on with more specifics…

over 98,00 WI residents ages 35-64 have neither a driver’s license nor a state ID
over 170,000 elderly persons aged 65 and older have neither a driver’s license nor a state ID
over 198,000 young adults (ages 18-24) do not have a valid driver’s license
over 83,000 students do not have a driver’s license with their current address on it. And while AB7 has been amended to allow student IDs, most student IDs do not currently meet the regulations.

NOW WE’RE TALKING!

We just counted over 10% of Wisconsin’s electorate that will be inconvenienced by this law. And as it turns out, most of this population has a tendency to vote in favor of such issues as: expanding social services, funding for public schools and college tuition, supporting civil rights, increasing minimum wages, and protecting medicare, medicaid, and social security. All of these issues are ones that typically put Democrats, and not Republicans, into office.

So at the expense of only $7.5M to Wisconsin’s state budget, this legislation will create a barrier for the 50 or less people who are inclined to vote illegally, and simultaneously create a barrier for at least 500,000 or so people who were able to vote LEGALLY, but inclined to support issues that put Democrats into office.

With all of that in mind, it should be easier to see why Republican legislators can easily get behind a Voter ID bill. Likewise, it should be clear why Democratic legislators are strongly opposed to a Voter ID bill.

The answer: It’s politics… as usual.

Any discussion beyond this simple truth about trying to win elections gets messy with partisan platitudes and harsh accusations from both sides (eg: still not creating jobs, supporting fraud, jim crow mentality, hard choices to create accountability, etc etc etc).

Most regular folks just want to be able to vote, and would like to see more people vote more often.

For reference: Assembly Bill 7

It is obviously a difficult time to be an elected official in Wisconsin. Certainly with all of the public polls (regardless of origin) indicating that the majority of people disagree with Scott Walker’s proposed agenda… it must be especially difficult to be an elected official who is on the opposing side of public opinion. 

It is uncommon for constituents to be paying very close attention to what legislators are up to. Town Hall Meetings are never this packed, and seldom this energized. It would be nearly impossible to be prepared for any situation that would resemble this.

However, the summary of what is going on in this scene is relatively straight forward…

People are not communicating in a fashion that is acceptable to one another. 

Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner (R) & State Senator Leah Vukmir (R) called a town hall meeting in Wauwatosa with the expectation of reading and referencing a prepared statement to a room full of constituents in order to explain their position on proposed public policy. Their constituents showed up for a town hall meeting with the expectation of participating in a dialog about public policy and getting answers to their concerns about the impacts of proposed policy on their immediate community. 

The unrest occurs because the people do not feel respected. They are standing in the same room as the officials whom they elected to lead them, and they are getting a distinct impression that their concerns are going ignored. 

Notice that the protest style chants about democracy are not taking hold in this particular audience. These people are not bussed-in union supporters, nor “hippies”, nor college students. These citizens don’t fit any of the pejorative stereotypes that have been used to describe the protestors in Madison. 

These are good old fashioned local constituents. This room full of community members wants straight talk from their elected leaders. They are not interested in pre-approved political messaging. These voters are not satisfied with half-answers or tired platitudes about the nation. They want to be treated respectfully, and they want to be told the truth about what is happening. 

This video gives me chills… 

• It gives me chills that this uproar happens in a peaceful manor in this great state, and this amazing country. 
• It gives me chills to think how powerful a small group of committed citizens can be when they are unified for a cause.
• It gives me chills on behalf of these elected officials, for that very same reason.

Wauwatosa is a northwest suburb of Milwaukee where Jim Sensenbrenner, Leah Vukmir, and Scott Walker all won majority votes in 2010. 

Whats Next?

A beautiful event, that I was very proud to be a small contributor to. While the entire day was moving, I was especially impressed by the keynote address by Professor Michelle Alexander. Her speech entitled, “The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration In the Age of Color Blindness”, obviously touched a nerve with many in the audience. In a County [Dane] where 47% of young black men are under the supervision of the criminal justice system, it makes sense that people would be shaken by her shining light on a national problem which we are not immune to.

Link to full event here (look for me in the background)