Lorraine writes:
I also think it's wrong to assume that
people who haven't registered to vote 7-30 days before an election are
necessarily less educated about the candidates or the election.
And as
Jeff observes, even if they are, this is no reason to bar them their
right to vote.
This follows on Jeff's comment:
4. What theory of democracy suggests that only the most organized
(see 3 above) ought to have a voice?
There is, of course, a deep rooted tradition and theory that voting
should be restricted to those who are most informed and who have
attained either obvious incentives to or certain indicia indicating
that they are likely to vote on an informed basis and in
consideration of the good of the community. Indeed, this desire to
have a better informed citizenry is behind many proposals for
election reform, and especially represents a powerful strain of
thought in the campaign finance reform community, and is also a
common theme used to support restrictions on ballot access. I
think it would be fair to say that the more popular current view of
the right to vote - reflected by Lorraine and Jeff - has a much
more recent pedigree than the assumptions that seem to underlie Mr.
Levine comments.
This is not to say that Jeff and Lorraine are not, ultimately,
correct - it becomes in large part a question of deeply held
normative views on the purpose of voting and elections, and also
empirical understandings of the electorate and voting behavior.
Also, as Daniel Ortiz argued in a very fine article in the Stanford
Law Review a few years back, "The Democratic Paradox of Campaign
Finance Reform," a major concern is that rules justified by the
desire to assure that voters are informed and responsible are
readily subject to abuse, and hae been used as crude proxies for
disenfranchising disfavored groups. But the argument Mr. Levine
makes is a very serious one and can by no means be dispatched by
categorical assertions that it is unsupported by any theory of
democracy. Both Lorraine and Jeff join the empirical debate
against Mr. Levine's position, but merely suggesting that Mr.
Levine's position doesn't fit into some theory of democracy doesn't
really join the normative d!
ebate at all.
Brad Smith
________________________________
From: owner-election-law_gl@majordomo.lls.edu on behalf of Lorraine
C. Minnite
Sent: Wed 12/21/2005 8:50 AM
To: election-law@majordomo.lls.edu
Subject: Re: Judge says legislature, not courts can enact same-day
registration
One of the substantive claims made in the CT case was that, in fact,
most "voter education" through the media (paid ads and other
discussionabout the candidates or the contest) occurs in the week
or two before
the election, AFTER the cut-off date for voter registration in most
states. Studies of EDR suggest it benefits two types of people - one
that Jeff notes, the mobile, the other, youth. As we move toward
centralized computerized list management of the voter rolls the
concernabout fraud is hard to sustain. I also think it's wrong to
assume that
people who haven't registered to vote 7-30 days before an election are
necessarily less educated about the candidates or the election.
And as
Jeff observes, even if they are, this is no reason to bar them their
right to vote.
Jeff Hauser wrote:
1. The amount of material sent by most states is so much less
than that
by CA that I think this comment's premise is way off-base.
2. Do we really believe that huge chunks of the citizenry of
states that
generate this informtation read them? Direct mail professionals
doing> work for politicos design radically different pieces
designed to be
effective in, oh, 15 seconds, arguing against the idea that a)
citizens> read long materials sent them withouit request and b)
arguing against
thinking our democracy is working if voters rely on direct mail.
3. The premises of this e-mail = also completely ignore the massive
increase in mobility in America. Busy people who move between
voting> should not be expected to request, receive, and process voter
registration materials every time they move and before elections.
4. What theory of democracy suggests that only the most organized
(see 3
above) ought to have a voice?
5. Most voters vote based off information from the "earned
media," and
of course TV and Internet and print ads supplement that.
Furthermore,> community leaders and, of course, PARTY AFFILIATION
serve as
particularly effective heuristics.
------------------------------------------------------------------
------
From: owner-election-law_gl@majordomo.lls.edu
[mailto:owner-election-law_gl@majordomo.lls.edu] On Behalf Of
Levine, Lloyd
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 2:40 AM
To: ban@richardwinger.com; election-law@majordomo.lls.edu
Subject: Re: Judge says legislature, not courts can enact same-day
registration
The one thing I find interesting about all this talk of same day
registration is what isn't said. Usually the concept is
discussed as a
cure for declining participation. It is often rejected because of
"fraud> concerns." It seems to me there is one other significant
problem with
same day voter registration: lack of voter education. Wasn't it
Thomas> Jefferson who argued that what the country needs is an
informed> citizenry? Exactly how informed of the issues will a
person be if that
person didn't bother to register until Election Day? They will
not have
received any of the information from the state, including candidate
statements, and arguments for and against initiatives, nor will they
have received any information from the candidates or ballot measures
themselves. How is someone supposed to cast an informed vote under
those circumstances? The current voter registration laws of
most, if
not all, states are such that it is relatively easy to register to
vote. I believe the appropriate question is: do we prize
participation> more than we value informed participation?
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-election-law_gl@majordomo.lls.edu
<owner-election-law_gl@majordomo.lls.edu>
To: election-law@majordomo.lls.edu <election-law@majordomo.lls.edu>
Sent: Tue Dec 20 16:16:41 2005
Subject: Judge says legislature, not courts can enact same-day
registration>
> December 20, 2005, 5:56 PM EST
> HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) _ A federal judge ruled
> Tuesday that it's up to
> the state legislature, not the courts, to decide
> whether Connecticut should
> allow people to register to vote on Election Day.
>
> Two voters, the Connecticut Working Families
> Party and six public
> interest groups _ some active in voter registration
> _ sued the state,
> arguing that Connecticut blocks people from
> registering at the very time
> politics is at its peak.
>
> They also claimed the U.S. Constitution
> guarantees citizens the right
> to register to vote on the same day they cast their
> ballots. Connecticut's
> law, they argued, violates their rights to equal
> protection, to vote, to
> associate and engage in political speech.
>
> But U.S. District Judge Mark Kravitz said
> Connecticut's system is
> already liberal because it allows people to register
> to vote up to seven
> days in person before an election. He said the
> process is easy and the
> deadline is not discriminatory or severe.
>
> "Most other states requiring pre-election-day
> registration require
> their citizens to register to vote three to four
> weeks before a general
> election," he wrote in his 60-page opinion.
> "Therefore, if Connecticut's
> shortest-in-the pre-election-day registration
> requirement cannot pass
> constitutional muster, it is doubtful that any
> state's can."
>
> Six states in the nation allow same-day
> registration. Advocates claim
> it is a way to significantly increase voter
> participation.
>
> In 2003, Connecticut lawmakers passed same-day
> registration, but
> then-Gov. John G. Rowland vetoed the legislation. He
> said, at the time,
> there were not enough protections in the system to
> prevent fraud.
>
> Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz said
> Tuesday that she supports
> the concept of same-day registration. Since
> Rowland's veto, she said, the
> state has a computerized voter registration system
> that prevents people from
> voting twice or committing other types of fraud. But
> Bysiewicz said it
> should be up to the legislature to enact the change.
>
> She predicted the issue will likely come up in
> the next legislative
> session, which begins in February.
> Copyright 2005 Newsday Inc.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com