[EL] voter ID backlash after the election?

[Doug Hess]

Great resources, Paul.

Charles's prediction that "Once these [ID] laws are in place, they will
undoubtedly become even more popular at the mass level, and local officials
will resist changing procedures YET AGAIN" is interesting.

As experience with the law unfolds, we'll have to see if the law remains
popular AND exploited in the same way by policy makers and opinion leaders.
I guess Tea Partiers could join in the fray if attempts are made to
liberalize the most restrictive ID laws, but I don't think this issue came
just from them. Instead, the push came from GOP candidates and networks
of elites (operatives in this case) who were delighted to see that the issue
served as a nice bit of "red meat" to toss out there to a portion of the
public that is fearful, as Paul rightly points out, of nonwhite political
incorporation and that falls for paranoia about noncitizens (and ACORN,
largely used as code for urban voters) stealing elections.

In the end, the framing that drives some agressive public support for the
laws (as opposed to a more bland support of "well it seems reasonable")
seems to me to be the following: Elections are being stolen because of all
these illegal votes which ID laws will address. Some people who don't like
the results of an election have a hard time believing that the majority of
the voting public doesn't vote as they do...thus, they reason, it must be
due to election machines manipulated by business leaders (the left) or due
to illegal or repeat voters (the right).

When some supporters of ID policy see that they still lose some races after
"fixing" the problem, they will have to readjust their policy target and
this could mean the issue loses momentum. If other supporters see it as just
"reasonable," this aspect may not matter, but I assume the support is rather
thin and without somebody pushing it, that "support" won't matter.

Again, as long as there are stories about sympathetic people inconvenienced
or their ballots not counted because of the law....I think the campaign on
this law will lose steam and the law (or regs implementing the law as the
case may be) will be eventually liberalized. I do think this is one of those
policy issues where the longer it is dragged out, the more likely
opponents (of ID laws) will win.

Doug

On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 8:45 PM, Paul Gronke <paul.gronke at gmail.com> wrote:

> Jeff
>
> Thanks for the block!
>
> Mark,
>
> A general cite is this:Williamson V, Skocpol T, Coggin J. The Tea Party and
> the Remaking of Republican Conservatism. Perspectives on Politics.
> 2011;9(01):25-43. The takeaway quote is here:
>
> "We find that the Tea Party is a new incarnation of longstanding strands in
> US conservatism. The anger of grassroots Tea Partiers about new federal
> social programs such as the Affordable Care Act coexists with considerable
> acceptance, even warmth, toward long-standing federal social programs like
> Social Security and Medicare, to which Tea Partiers feel legitimately
> entitled. Opposition is concentrated on resentment of perceived federal
> government “handouts” to “undeserving” groups, the definition of which seems
> heavily influenced by racial and ethnic stereotypes. More broadly, Tea Party
> concerns exist within the context of anxieties about racial, ethnic, and
> generational changes in American society. Previous scholars, including
> Martin Gilens, have noted connections between racial stereotyping and
> opposition to parts of US social provision, particularly “welfare” for poor
> mothers.8 Additionally, Theda Skocpol has written about generational
> fault-lines in the post-World War II history of US social policy.9 We
> explain how Tea Party reactions and attitudes fit into this picture."
>
> Jeff is right, these terms are controversial, and scholars who labor in
> these areas have differed on what phrases to use to represent the concepts
> they study. I am using these terms and will try to explain them as best I
> can, but please understand that public opinion scholars have their own
> inside jargon just as other fields do.
>
> The term "authoritarianism"  comes out of work by Adorno et al. in the
> 1950s and was an attempt to understand the basis of public support for the
> rise of fascism in Germany and Italy.  They argued that there were certain
> personality traits that clustered together--allegiance to authority,
> aggression toward those who subscribe to unconventional views, a preference
> for simple over complex answers, a resistance to change.  The work was
> highly controversial, particularly since Adorno and colleagues connected
> this to particular cultures (not surprisingly, German and Italian) and
> disappeared from most scholarship for a few decades.   It has been revived
> in the past 20 years, primarily by social psychologists, and the work has
> been separated from the cultural and political baggage that accompanied the
> original work.    If you want cites on this, just search on
> "authoritarianism and public opinion."
>
> The measurement is primarily a series of questions having to do with child
> rearing, I suppose to put it simply, a series of "spare the rod spoil the
> child" items.  You may object to the measurement, but there have been dozens
> of studies showing a strong relationship between the scale and political
> attitudes and behavior.  Search on "Hetherington", "Stenner", "Feldman"
> among others for a slice of this literature.
>
> Mark, your second definition about punishment is right on target.  I'm not
> sure the degree to which Tea Party affiliators are more libertarian,
> religious, or what variant of conservative.  There is no denying that they
> are extremely conservative.  The mix is unclear, and the studies are only
> now coming out.  I'll try to find some cites and put them at the end of this
> email, but I think a lot of pieces will be coming out at the forthcoming
> APSA meeting.
>
> The term "racial resentment" is similarly charged.  In brief, it was an
> attempt in the 70s and 80s to acknowledge the end of what might be termed
> "old fashioned" racism, but to isolate a continuing source of political
> conflict, where many white Americans, while not endorsing traditional racial
> stereotypes, still said that Blacks failed to embody traditional American
> values of hard work, stable families, etc.  "Racially tinged individualism"
> in one scholar's description.
>
> The items used to measure racial resentment are: 1) “Irish, Italians,
> Jewish, and many other minorities overcame prejudice and worked their way
> up. blacks should do the same without any special favors.” (2) “Over the
> past few years blacks have gotten less than they deserve.” (3) “It's really
> a matter of some people not trying hard enough; if blacks would only try
> harder they could be just as well off as whites.” (4) “Generations of
> slavery and discrimination have created conditions that make it difficult
> for blacks to work their way out of the lower class.” (5) “Government
> officials usually pay less attention to a request or complaint from a black
> person than from a white person.” (6) Most blacks who receive money from
> welfare programs could get along without it if they tried.”
>
> Search on "racial resentment" in Google scholar for cites.
>
> Both sets of items have been subjected to a lot of scrutiny.  Putting the
> debate aside, the same respondents who express support for or affiliate with
> the Tea Party *do* score high on these measure.  You may read into this what
> you like, but I still don't think it's particularly controversial to suggest
> that, with these attitudinal correlates, Tea Party affiliators are unlikely
> to be swayed by arguments that voter ID is overly intrusive or
> discriminatory.
>
>
>
> ---
> Paul Gronke                Ph:  503-517-7393
>                                       Fax: 734-661-0801
>
> Professor, Reed College
> Director, Early Voting Information Center 3203 SE Woodstock Blvd.
> Portland OR 97202
>
> EVIC: http://earlyvoting.net
>
>
>
>
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 9:39 AM, Milyo, Jeffrey D. wrote:
>
> > In the spirit of the holiday, I'll join the parade.
> >
> > There are indeed studies to suggest the correlations that Paul speaks of
> (and no doubt many more in the offing), but the line of research is
> tendentious (I'm not really sure what that word means, but I've always been
> impressed when other people use it, so hopefully the smart folks on this
> list will infer some coherent meaning to my statement).  I think many folks
> would quibble with the way in which "racial resentment" is measured in those
> studies, and therefore what exactly, if anything, they show.  That said,
> within the accepted definitions and practices of the extant literature,
> Paul's claim is entirely defensible.   But the spirit of Mark's objections
> and his intuition about definitions and biases are right on point.  Oh, and
>  I agree with Charles, too.
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:
> law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Scarberry,
> Mark
> > Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 11:12 AM
> > To: Paul Gronke; Charles Stewart III
> > Cc: Doug Hess; Election Law
> > Subject: Re: [EL] voter ID backlash after the election?
> >
> > I'm sorry, but such statements are not nonjudgmental, and it is not a
> further detour into Tea Party issues to ask for some backup. The questions
> that are asked on such surveys, the definition of the categories (such as
> authoritarianism and racial resentment), and the interpretation of the
> results may have a very substantial effect on the conclusions to be drawn.
> Possible biases of researchers or possibly dubious and value-laden
> assumptions undergirding standards used in particular fields of study should
> not be ignored.
> >
> > References to the studies, preferably on line, would be appreciated.
> >
> > To the extent that authoritarianism is considered to include campus
> speech codes, closed union shops, a large administrative bureaucracy,
> organized public workers using political muscle to require other citizens to
> fund lavish pensions, government regulation that makes formation and
> operation of small businesses difficult, imposition of values by judges over
> public opposition, or features of what might be called the nanny state
> (requirements that bicycle riders wear helmets, smoking bans, etc.), I'd be
> surprised to see Tea Party members scoring high on authoritarian scales.
> (Full disclosure: My wife is allergic to cigarette smoke, and we're very
> grateful that smoking has been banned in most enclosed public places in
> California. And Brown v. Board was a necessary and just judicial action that
> went against much public opinion. So call me an authoritarian.)
> >
> > To the extent that authoritarianism includes a desire for serious
> punishment of criminal behavior or similar matters, I wouldn't be surprised.
> >
> > My sense is that many Tea Party supporters would consider themselves to
> be somewhat libertarian rather than authoritarian. Paul even refers to the
> "libertarian wing of the GOP / Tea Party." But I haven't seen the empirical
> literature and would appreciate getting references.
> >
> > Mark S. Scarberry
> > Professor of Law
> > Pepperdine Univ. School of Law
> > Malibu, CA 90263
> > (310) 506-4667
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:
> law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Paul Gronke
> > Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 8:28 AM
> > To: Charles Stewart III
> > Cc: Doug Hess; Election Law
> > Subject: Re: [EL] voter ID backlash after the election?
> >
> > Charles raises an interesting issue, and as usual, I agree with him.
> >
> > One twist might be if the libertarian wing of the GOP / Tea Party sees
> this as governmental intrusion, but I've seen little indication of this.
>  Survey data has also shown a strong relationship between measures such as
> authoritarianism, racial resentment, and racial and ethnic stereotyping
> among respondents who profess affiliation with the Tea Party.  Given that
> support for voter ID shows some of the same correlations, I would not expect
> a libertarian backlash.
> >
> > (I do NOT want this to detour into a debate on the Tea Party, which is
> why I've kept the remarks above purposely non-judgmental.  The correlations
> I refer to are, in my mind, an empirical fact, replicated across many
> surveys.  I'll leave the substantive interpretation to others.)
> > ---
> > Paul Gronke   Ph:   503-517-7393
> >                        Fax: 503-661-0601
> >
> > Professor, Reed College
> > Director, Early Voting Information Center
> > 3203 SE Woodstock Blvd
> > Portland OR 97202
> >
> > EVIC: http://earlyvoting.net
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Law-election mailing list
> > Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> > http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110703/c9436801/attachment.html>