[EL] backlash on voter ID

Wed Nov 14 10:55:47 PST 2012

Two stories on voter ID backlash:

http://news.yahoo.com/black-vote-ohio-fueled-voter-id-bills-131452246--politics.html

http://ballots.blogspot.com/2012/11/dan-mcgrath-v-dan-mcgrath-on-voter-id.html

I suspect that the Voter Fraud = Felony billboards in Ohio did more harm
than good.

Between voter ID and the anti-marriage votes, the GOP is being falsely
perceived as anti-black, accurately perceived as anti-gay, and perceived as
anti-Latino. That in turn affects moderate and liberal voters. I think
there was measurable voter ID backlash in OH, WI, and MN. Not so much in
Indiana.

I wrote here a while ago about my roommate, who wasn't allowed to register
to vote at the BVM because of a felony. We got him registered,and I took
him to vote on election day. We declined to show ID, and were told we
couldn't vote. 14 minutes later my other roommate asked if they'd let us
vote provisional ballots, and the lady agreed, and we did. Of course I wish
he hadn't brought it up; it would have been a cleaner case if she'd just
sent us away without being able to vote.

I'm wondering the lists opinions on whether these facts, 1. told we
couldn't vote, instead of being offered provisional ballots, 2. a 14 minute
delay, 3 the voter having to ask for provisional ballots instead of having
them offered, are enough to constitute a denial of voting rights. This is
the third time that I've had an Indiana election official not offer the
provisional ballot when they are supposed to. Whether one is for voter ID
or against it, in Indiana it isn't working as it is supposed to.
My roommate needs counsel to be able to pursue this further.

On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Doug Hess <douglasrhess at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks, David and David, for those replies. I had mentioned to some other
> voting rights consultants/groups that anger over the voter ID law could be
> used to increase turnout among some groups. Not sure if it did have that
> effect, but certainly it was in the press a lot (e.g., as a civil rights
> issue).
>
>
> Douglas R. Hess, PhD
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 3:22 PM, David A. Schultz <dschultz at gw.hamline.edu
> > wrote:
>
>> In Minnesota, the recapturing of the state legislature by the Democrats
>> in part can be ascribed to voter backlash regarding perceptions that the
>> Republicans overreached in placing constitutional amendments on the ballot
>> that wold impose voter ID and ban same-sex marriage. The two amendments
>> worked together to encourage voting against the amendments and then
>> straight party-line voting for Democrats.    Keep in mind that the two
>> amendments were passed in the legislature by near straight party-line votes.
>>
>>
>> David Schultz, Professor
>> Editor, Journal of Public Affairs Education (JPAE)
>> Hamline University
>> School of Business
>> 570 Asbury Street
>> Suite 308
>> St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
>> 651.523.2858 (voice)
>> 651.523.3098 (fax)
>> http://davidschultz.efoliomn.com/
>> http://works.bepress.com/david_schultz/
>> http://schultzstake.blogspot.com/
>> Twitter: @ProfDSchultz
>> Skype: david.schultz1958
>> Named one of the inaugural 2012 FacultyRow SuperProfessors
>>
>> >>> David Segal ** 11/13/12 2:08 PM >>>
>>
>>  FWIW, the Speaker of the RI House of Reps survived a strong in-district
>> challenge from a lefty independent wherein the Speaker's support for voter
>> ID was one of the two major issues in play, and from what I hear, something
>> that constituents regularly brought up at the doors.  He's promised to
>> revisit it.  I think the Dem establishment in RI has also been getting a
>> lot of flack from national actors -- it's just mind-boggling that they
>> didn't understand how aberrant their actions were ahead of time.
>>
>>
>> http://www.rifuture.org/speaker-fox-promises-to-reconsider-voter-id-law.html
>> ------------------------------
>> From: douglasrhess at gmail.com
>> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:38:51 -0500
>> To: Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> Subject: [EL] backlash on voter ID
>>
>>
>> I suspected there would be a backlash to the voter ID laws and it seems
>> there is a bit of one. The post-election publicity on the issue, that I've
>> seen, has not been enormous--perhaps because the defeat was decisive, thus
>> making the issue of IDs less significant in post-election analysis--but it
>> seems the delays caused by voter ID confusion is partially to blame in some
>> places for long lines. More importantly, the ballot initiative in MN
>> failed.
>>
>> Of course, it remains to be seen if the supporters of IDs are able to
>> assemble any evidence that IDs improved the system, compared to the obvious
>> costs, in the broad sense. Or perhaps they will demonstrate that the costs
>> was slight (which may be hard as it will be difficult to know how much the
>> parties, campaigns, and nonprofits spent on helping people overcome any ID
>> related problems). Ultimately, if efforts to push ID laws continue, it
>> seems safe to bet that it will be easier to push for less onerous versions
>> or interpretations. Likewise, it will be interesting to see if current laws
>> are also amended or implemented more liberally.
>>
>> Are there any ongoing studies of ID laws that used last week's election
>> for data collection?
>>
>> Douglas R. Hess, PhD
>> Washington, DC
>> ph. 202-277-6400
>> douglasrhess at gmail.com
>>
>> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20121114/c2d430f3/attachment.html>