[EL] Question on voters who by-pass voter ID requirements

Tue Nov 8 19:21:56 PST 2011

As a former pollworker (I was not one today -- the hours are just 
horrible!), I have questioned whether pollworkers are qualified (or 
alert enough, given when they have to wake up) to judge the authenticity 
of IDs and whether IDs match the person presenting them.

If the foundation of our democracy is at risk, voter ID assessment 
should probably be a job for the TSA, or other specially-trained 
Homeland Security agents. Surely federal agents would treat all voters 
with equal regard.(As a bonus, they might find Larry Levine's hand 
grenades.)

- dah

On 11/8/2011 6:28 PM, Doug Hess wrote:
> Interesting. Although I am willing to assume, at least use as a null
> hyp., that people who act in a way that has a disproportionate impact
> on those less like themselves  do so largely "unthinkingly" even
> though the result is the same as a more partisan model of behavior.
>
> Keep in mind, too, that non-white poll workers may ask non-white
> voters to follow procedures more often than they ask white voters. I
> believe there is evidence of this. Anybody know of the paper that
> shows this? I need to set up an EndNote or RefWorks file someday of
> this stuff.
>
> Doug Hess
> 202-277-6400 (cell)
>
> The information contained in this email is confidential and may
> contain proprietary information. It is meant solely for the intended
> recipient(s). Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If
> you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
> distribution or any action taken or omitted in reliance on this is
> prohibited and may be unlawful.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Larry Levine<larrylevine at earthlink.net>  wrote:
>> I'll throw the hand grenade into the discussion by extending Doug's question
>> to ask: might a conservative, possible Republican or Tea Party polling place
>> worker be more inclined to "look the other way" on some voters and less so
>> on other voters? I can hear the Republicans on this list screaming that the
>> exact opposite is a bigger worry.
>> Larry
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
>> [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Doug
>> Hess
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 1:45 PM
>> To: Election Law
>> Subject: [EL] Question on voters who by-pass voter ID requirements
>>
>> In talking to some college students the other day, it occurred to me that in
>> addition to people who may face higher costs to voting under Voter ID laws
>> or who find it very hard to get the proper ID, there is also the possibility
>> that some classes of people will be allowed to vote even if they do not have
>> the right ID. I know some thought has been given to people who are
>> improperly asked for ID in states where it is not required, etc., but what
>> about the reverse?  Might voters in smaller towns, or voters benefiting from
>> positive regard by the election workers be allowed to vote when they
>> shouldn't? After all, "look the other way" events form bias if, when
>> aggregated, it occurs more often for members of some groups than others.
>>
>> It would seem this should be as important a line of research and
>> argumentation as the concern of people having a hard time voting, at least
>> for concerns about discrimination against a class of voters. In other words,
>> even if the law is not applied in a discriminatory fashion AGAINST certain
>> voters, is it applied in a discriminatory fashion in FAVOR of some voters? I
>> guess supporters of ID laws may say that is just an implementation problem,
>> but given that the law doesn't address a real policy concern, it does seem
>> one more category of cost against the zero benefits of these laws.
>>
>> Has much been done on this? I recall that there was some work done 3-4 years
>> ago on race and identity checking in the southwest. I forget if it looked at
>> failures to implement the law that favored people, or just looked at
>> failures that harmed individuals through improper identity checking or
>> rejection.
>>
>> I guess people who know they should not have been allowed to vote are not
>> likely to come forward, but certainly some election officials or volunteers
>> might be willing to say (perhaps sheepishly) that they have done it by
>> mistake or seen it happen (or are concerned that it is happening).
>>
>> Doug Hess
>> 202-277-6400 (cell)
>>
>> The information contained in this email is confidential and may contain
>> proprietary information. It is meant solely for the intended recipient(s).
>> Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the
>> intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action
>> taken or omitted in reliance on this is prohibited and may be unlawful.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
> -- 
> David A. Holtzman, M.P.H., J.D.
> david at holtzmanlaw.com
>
> Notice: This email (including any files transmitted with it) may be 
> confidential, for use only by intended recipients.  If you are not an 
> intended recipient or a person responsible for delivering this email 
> to an intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email 
> in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or 
> copying of this email is strictly prohibited.  If you have received 
> this email in error, please immediately notify the sender and discard 
> all copies.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111108/4b6a48be/attachment.html>