[EL] new ID data

[Rick Hasen]

I'd add that a .3 swing is a pretty significant risk of swinging a swing 
state even if one were concerned only about presidential elections.
On 7/23/13 10:06 AM, Justin Levitt wrote:
> What's also missing in this analysis is concern about anything other 
> than the final outcome of a Presidential race.
>
> Yes, the piece 
> <http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113986/voter-id-north-carolina-law-hurts-democrats> 
> finds that "the electoral consequences of voter ID seem relatively 
> marginal," by noting that with ID, Obama's final share of the North 
> Carolina vote might have dropped from 48.3 to 48%.
>
> But the piece also notes that this latest data reveals that there are 
> somewhere around 319,000 registered voters currently without a 
> state-issued photo ID, "just" (just!) 138,425 of whom participated in 
> the 2012 general election.  There is no estimate of the number of 
> currently unregistered but eligible voters who don't now have a 
> state-issued photo ID, but it's got to add to the pile.
>
> For those who think the most important measure of the impact of an 
> electoral policy is the outcome of a Presidential race, why have a 
> national election at all?  Polling science is pretty good: we could 
> just declare the winner of every state where the margin of victory is 
> larger than the margin of error in several consecutive polls in the 
> last week of October, and only bother with actually letting people 
> vote in the very few states where polls don't deliver a clear answer.  
> Holding an election seems like a really expensive way to confirm the 
> pretty-much-guaranteed winner.  Or, put differently, if you're just 
> focused on Presidential outcome, "the electoral consequences of 
> holding an election seem relatively marginal."
>
> Justin
> -- 
> Justin Levitt
> Associate Professor of Law
> Loyola Law School | Los Angeles
> 919 Albany St.
> Los Angeles, CA  90015
> 213-736-7417
> justin.levitt at lls.edu
> ssrn.com/author=698321
> On 7/23/2013 9:24 AM, Rick Hasen wrote:
>>
>>
>>     "Finally, Real Numbers on Voter ID"
>>     <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53331>
>>
>> Posted on July 23, 2013 9:21 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=53331> 
>> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>>
>> Nate Cohn 
>> <http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113986/voter-id-north-carolina-law-hurts-democrats>:
>>
>>     These data leave no question about whether voter ID laws have a
>>     disparate impact on non-white voters. In that sense, Democratic
>>     fears and Republican hopes are confirmed. But the North Carolina
>>     data also suggests that voter ID laws are unlikely to flip the
>>     outcome of a national election, even if it does have an
>>     objectionable, disparate impact on non-white and
>>     Democratic-leaning voters. That doesn't mean it couldn't play a
>>     role in a close election---and close elections do happen. But
>>     Republicans expecting to flip Pennsylvania or Democrats fearing
>>     that Republicans will steal elections with voter ID should be
>>     circumspect about the comparatively modest electoral
>>     consequences. Many of the registered voters without a photo ID
>>     just aren't voting and 40 percent of them are probably voting
>>     Republican. If you want voter ID because you think you'll steal
>>     Pennsylvania, or you're opposed because you're concerned it's a
>>     Democratic apocalypse, move on. It's not the apocalypse, even if
>>     it is an affront to voting rights.
>>
>> That's pretty much the conclusion I drew last year in /The Voting 
>> Wars 
>> <http://www.amazon.com/The-Voting-Wars-Election-Meltdown/dp/0300198248/ref=tmm_pap_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1329286945&sr=1-2-catcorr>/.  
>> What's missing from this analysis is the role that the voter id 
>> debate plays on both sides in driving up turnout and spurring 
>> fundraising.
>>
>> Posted in election administration 
>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, The Voting Wars 
>> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60> | Comments Off
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

-- 
Rick Hasen
Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
949.824.3072 - office
949.824.0495 - fax
rhasen at law.uci.edu
hhttp://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130723/9e239947/attachment.html>