Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
Reddit
This is the third in a series of posts concerned with just democracy. The first was an overview of the current state of our electoral system; the second a look at the prospects for a national popular vote for president.
Between 2 and 4 million Americans were unable to vote in the last election because of problems with their registration. And that's just people who tried to vote; in 2006, there were more than 65 million who were eligible to vote, but weren't even registered. That's a third of potential voters.
It doesn't have to be this way. Registration rates in other countries frequently run upwards of 90 percent (both Canada and France hit that mark, for example, while Venezuela stands at roughly 94 percent, and Russia about 97). Now reformers are seizing the moment to use existing law to expand registration, as well as considering new laws that could finally put the United States on an equal footing with many of the world's other democracies.
"That's a pretty staggering number," says Project Vote's executive director Michael Slater of the millions unable to cast a ballot in 2008. "We don't have the egregious problems with voter registration that we had in the past, but it's still a system that's far from perfect and it's still a system that's preventing people from voting in America."
As with too much else in America, the divide between the registered and the unregistered isn't neutral. The think tank Demos estimates that while 80 percent of citizens in households making $100,000 or more a year are registered to vote, only 60 percent of those making less than $25,000 a year can say the same.
The National Voter Registration Act, passed in 1993 and often known as the 'Motor-Voter' Law because it made it possible to register to vote at your local DMV, was intended not only to make registration easier, but to begin closing the chasm between rich and poor voters. Section 7 of the act instructed public assistance agencies to offer everyone who walked through their doors an opportunity to register to vote. At first states complied and registrations jumped, but as of 2006 voter registration applications from public assistance agencies had plummeted from over 2.5 million to below 500,000.
Along with Project Vote and the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Demos has set about challenging states to comply with the NVRA. In Missouri, the state's public assistance agencies had collected a measly 15,500 registrations in 2005 and 2006. In the six months after the coalition won a court ruling against the state in July 2008, those same agencies saw 90,000 new registrations. North Carolina saw a similar six-fold increase in registrations, while Virginia saw monthly registration applications leap eight-fold.
Iowa offers an even more compelling demonstration of the benefits of enforcing the NVRA. Even though Iowa had one of the highest voter registration rates in the country, after the Governor lit a fire under its public assistance agencies (or ordered its public assistance agencies to comply with law), the state still saw a stampede of new voters through those agencies' doors: a mind-boggling 3000 percent increase over 2003. As a report issued by Project Vote and Demos concludes, if this is what happens in a state with a strong registration rate, states with low registration rates can expect even more dramatic results.
On the other side of the scale, there's the state of Maryland. In the two years after the NVRA was passed, Maryland registered a mere 982 voters via its public assistance agencies. After a private party filed suit, the state got its act together. In 1999 and 2000, those same agencies registered 32,250 people. Then the agreement by which the suit had been settled came to an end in 2001, and public assistance registrations tumbled back down to around 1,000. "Most states which are covered by the NVRA are not in compliance," says Project Vote's executive director, Michael Slater. "The lesson that we draw from this is the old line that vigilance is the cost of liberty. Performance needs to be monitored and states that are failing need to be taken to task." Project Vote and Demos have already issued 'notice letters' to six of the forty-four states covered by the act that they're failing to comply, the first step toward taking legal action against them.
"The good news is the Justice Department is actually interested in enforcing this again," says Regina Eaton, the Deputy Director of the Democracy Program at Demos. "We've already seen a marked change in attitude." 13 million people who make less than $25,000 a year aren't registered to vote. Their chances of voting just got a whole lot better.
Placing the burden on voters to register before they can participate in elections was first done in Massachusetts in 1801, but it was only after the 15th Amendment granted African-American men the right to vote and waves of immigrants began arriving on the country's shores that such laws gained traction. Under the original Massachusetts law, town assessors drew up lists of voters, which were then publicly posted. If come election day your name wasn't on the list, you could simply present the necessary documents and register to vote. Since then, many states have shifted the burden onto the voter and closed the window in which it's possible to register. "Voter registration deadlines vary widely across the nation," says Demos' Eaton, observing that "these cut-off dates bear little relevance to a state's ability to run smooth elections."
As evidence, Eaton cites the experience of the nine states which now allow voters to register and cast their ballot on the same day. Usually referred to as election day registration (EDR) -- except in those states like North Carolina where election day is off limits, but voters can still register and cast their ballot early, where it's therefore known as same day registration -- this simple reform holds the potential to dramatically increase participation in our democracy. Every one of the five states with the highest percent turnout in 2008 used EDR, and on average, states with EDR saw turnout rates 7 percent higher than those without. Historically, states with EDR have enjoyed an even greater advantage, usually leading the rest of the country by between 10 and 12 percent.
In the wake of the 2004 election, the AGs of New Hampshire and Wisconsin both launched investigations of EDR voters for fraud. In both states, the practice was vindicated. Demos' early estimates suggest that in the last election over 1.1 million Americans used EDR and SDR to vote. Iowa, which enacted EDR in 2007, saw the highest turnout in state history in 2008, even as the number of provisional ballots cast (between 20 and 33 percent of which often go uncounted) plunged by almost 70 percent between 2004 and 2008. Young voters in particular benefit from EDR. As young Americans, especially college students, are highly mobile, EDR ensures that they can show up at the polls and vote on Election Day. Research suggests that EDR could raise turnout of young voters in presidential elections by 14 percent.
Yet these reforms still leave the burden of registration on the voter. The holy grail of registration reform remains universal registration. As the Election Protection coalition states in its report on the 2008 election, this would mean a registration system that was automatic, permanent (providing voters an opportunity to update their registration when they changed their name or address, for example), and allows for voters to correct any mistakes on election day. "A system where everybody's registered in some fashion automatically is much better than the patchwork system we have now," says Regina Eaton of Demos. "But that doesn't mean we don't need a way to make corrections. And there will be errors." In her analysis, EDR is part of the foundation of universal registration.
Michael Waldman, executive director of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU, calls universal registration "potentially the most significant improvement since the Voting Rights Act of 1965." He sees it as the surest path toward giving those 65 million more potential voters a voice in our democracy. "Roughly a third of eligible Americans still are not registered," Waldman says. "They tend to be less educated. They tend to be people who are locked out of the system. We don't expect people who are going to court to rustle up their own juries. Making sure that every citizen is registered should be a core responsibility of government."
Project Vote's Michael Slater is quick to sound a note of caution. He points to the troubled implementation of the Help America Vote Act's requirement that state's implement statewide voter registration databases. "Creating a brand new untested system has a real risk of making the system worse rather than better," he says. While he agrees with "the central tenet," that the state and not the individual should be responsible for registration, "we need to roll it out over a period of time so we know what we're getting. In the meantime we need to enforce what we have already, which would get us a long way toward universal registration."
As of this writing, Senator Chuck Schumer is reportedly considering introducing legislation to this effect in Congress soon. We may not have such a long way to go.
Share this article
Katrina vanden Heuvel
Thoughts on politics, current affairs, riffs and reflections on what’s in the news and what’s not--but should be.
RSS
MASKWELL Predicts....
I foresee something....coming clearer...it's a lot of posts about...a seed.
Wait...getting clearer...it's a TREE seed!
Even clearer....it's the seed of an OAK tree!!!!
heheh
Posted by Mask at 05/22/2009 @ 1:39pm
well, if the mexicans can do it...
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/22/2009 @ 2:04pm
THEY'LL MAKE NATIONAL ID CARDS WHICH WILL CAPTURE OUR SOULS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/22/2009 @ 2:25pm
Dick Cheney- "Saddam has tons of EDVs and NVRAs in the areas surrounding Baghdad!"
Posted by Mask at 05/22/2009 @ 3:00pm
KvH: ....many states have shifted the burden onto the voter......reforms still leave the burden of registration on the voter....
Where will this mentality stop?
Ohhhhhh, it's such a "burden" to register to vote! Maybe we ought to give each new registrant, poor of all kind and black in particular, a big fat check (name it: Make Registration Pay) to come on in and handle this tough "burden".
As this world gets more and more interconnected, where things that happen in Detroit affects Alabama & China, in Pakistan that affects the world, etc.....I think it's justifiable to require ANY new registrant to be both literate--equivalent to high school graduate--and mentally uninpaired.
I'm NOT suggesting that new registrant pass some basic testing of knowledge on issues, but they need to have the capability to read (if they choose to do so) and understand.
It'll never happen.......but hey, I can dream of some HOPE AND CHANGE too!
Posted by Happy at 05/22/2009 @ 3:05pm
everybody votin'!?!?!
how the hell will republicans EVER get elected?
LOL
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/22/2009 @ 4:57pm
how the hell will republicans EVER get elected?
LOL
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/22/2009 @ 4:57pm
They won't be running......at least NOT for office....they will have gone John Galt! Myself for sure!
Posted by Happy at 05/22/2009 @ 5:02pm
As a certified translator of leftist speak, let me translate Katrina's thread for those who are deficient in marxist double speak.
We need to make sure all the poor are registered to vote and vote often.
The poor are the catalyst to our marxist revolution. We (the far left) will ensure their vote with our platform of appealing to class warfare (redistribution of wealth, from each according to his ability, to each according to his need).
The appeal to the masses of a free ride on the backs of the wealthy and the corporations will make our path to socialism unstoppable.
Comrades, if we can pull this off, the end of the constitutional republic is near and democratic socialism like Europe may finally become a reality.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/22/2009 @ 5:35pm
Probably the most significant obstacle to voter registration is the difficulty, for workers, of getting to any governmental office during business hours. Same thing goes for voting on Tuesdays instead of Saturdays.
When I resided in Repub-controlled Arizona, I had to take three buses, a trip of several hours, to get to the county building in downtown Phoenix on the one evening when the registrar's office was open - this merely to report a change of address. The holding of evening hours on a single day before a presidential election was such a momentous event that a TV news crew showed up to report it. (I voted for Dukakis that year, by the way).
Posted by samcrossett at 05/22/2009 @ 5:35pm
The poor are the catalyst to our marxist revolution. We (the far left) will ensure their vote with our platform of appealing to class warfare (redistribution of wealth, from each according to his ability, to each according to his need).
The appeal to the masses of a free ride on the backs of the wealthy and the corporations will make our path to socialism unstoppable.
Comrades, if we can pull this off, the end of the constitutional republic is near and democratic socialism like Europe may finally become a reality.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/22/2009 @ 5:35pm | ignore this person | warn this person
sounds foolproof to me!!!
YEEEHAW!!!!
i'm gonna be yer komissar! bodies shall hang from every streetlamp!
but i'll look out for you. after confiscating all your rightwing propaganda "property" and your "church", i'll find you a job that keeps you out of the way and resembles a communist version of your current occupations.
but then folks will get sick of that and it will become stifling and the satano-aynrando fascists will come in and save the day!
bipolar democracy...
at least we're both americans...lol
Posted by ibbleblibble at 05/22/2009 @ 5:44pm
Seems strange that you have polling days on working days. In our civilised part of the world, where most work from Monday through Friday, voting (apart from postals) is always on a Saturday (8am to 6pm).
Your name is on the electoral roll from 18 years old (compulsory registration age from birth certificate data) until you cark it. (Think crims may get kicked off but that is under review).
Once you present at the desk and your name with address is ruled through and you are given a voting slip you are free to cast a vote, write some obscene political etc message for the scrutineers on it, according to your fancy or just throw it in the waste bin if you think no one is worthy of your vote. Thus it is compulsory booth attendance rather than compulsory voting.
School halls are mobilised along with school teachers who get paid for the day which finishes late in the night for them as they count the ballots, overseen by scrutineers. With this infrastructure in place it never takes more than a few minutes from entrance to exit.
Notice what Liberty says about workers voting for lefties. Doesn't work like that here. We have had conservative governments more often than Australian Labor Party governments. The last Conservative PM, John Howard was re-elected 3 times giving conservatives 4 consecutive victories.
I think you will find the lefties get their support from the educated class (I mean just look at this site) and the workers apart from their union leaders are generally split in favor of conservative politics. My guess , Liberty, is that the Joe the plumbers of the US A may just surprise those who think "compulsory voting" will give you lefty governments.
Commonsense, particularly at the polling booth is the great advantage the working class has.
Posted by lrjones4 at 05/22/2009 @ 8:46pm
We need to make sure all the poor are registered to vote and vote often. [egad!]
Posted by antisocialist at 05/22/2009 @ 5:35pm
but aren't all humans created equal?
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/22/2009 @ 11:24pm
They won't be running......at least NOT for office....they will have gone John Galt! Myself for sure!
Posted by Happy at 05/22/2009 @ 5:02pm | ignore this person | warn this person
"John Galt; The depiction portrays a society based on oppressive bureaucratic functionaries and a culture that embraces the "stifling mediocrity" and egalitarianism of socialistic idealism."
Thanks Happy! All this time and I just couldn't put my finger on why I so despised the implementation of the Obamanation that makes desolation admin. and the "new" Demoncrat party beyond rejecting the usual mindlessness of the wanting "something for nothing" combine of leftist socialist!
I'm already there as an Independent voter and didn't know it!
Posted by BigPasture at 05/23/2009 @ 12:56am
Posted by antisocialist at 05/22/2009 @ 5:35pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Intrestingly marxism has ALWAYS been the trademark basis for all the policies of the Demoncrat party after LBJ took over and it has become progressingly worse every voting cycle! Wonder why so many are just to dumb to notice it or maybe that is just what they are counting on?
Posted by BigPasture at 05/23/2009 @ 01:01am
How quickly do you get your election results?
That's always been the second most annoying part of the American electoral system, in my view, after the inherent corruption in the process of registration and vote-counting itself.
Posted by snowball666 at 05/23/2009 @ 08:52am
How are you Triple6. Just about my bedtime 12.30am Sunday here.
Election night is sort of an entertainment/competion thing appearing on most of our TV channels.
Generally starts about 7pm with loads of pollies and "experts" all trying to pick the winner first.
In a national election when there is a big swing against the government some of the boldest start to call the winner about 8pm. THE board (with different bells and whistles on each channel) has every electorate in Australia displayed with the number of votes for each candidate, percentage swing and likely winner. All updated as new info comes in. Pollies are generally best at picking these things because they have continual contact with the individual booths in all the swing electorates.
We have a preferential voting system so first past the post with less than 50% is not always the winner.
In most national elections (can't remember a hung parliament) the result is known by about 9pm. The loser concedes about 10.30pm and the winner makes an acceptance speech before the party faithful from a hotel where he has been holed up biting his fingernails since about 7pm.
The speech invariably begins with "some of you didn't vote for me but I'm going to govern for all Australians" We all know that is absolute bullshit but everyone still cheers. Our elections are enjoyed by all.
Incidentally no electronic voting. Paper slips and pencils only.
Posted by lrjones4 at 05/23/2009 @ 09:34am
We need to make sure all the poor are registered to vote and vote often. [egad!]
Posted by antisocialist at 05/22/2009 @ 5:35pm
but aren't all humans created equal?
Posted by frosty zoom at 05/22/2009 @ 11:24pm
Yes they are; which is why it is so shameful that the left uses them to obtain the power and control they seek.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/23/2009 @ 12:01pm
Anything that facilitates voter registration among under-represented classes in this country is a good & just thing.
Think back to the pre & post Revolution eras when the horsey sets (gentry) only allowed the yeoman farmers limited voting rights with extreme limitations on entry into governmental decision making.
Factor in the slaves & indentured servants who prepped & served the sumptuous dinners that were so wildly popular in ye olden days & you have a real incentive today to pull out all the stops to increase voter rolls.
Posted by Sorelish at 05/23/2009 @ 12:05pm
In voters it's not the quantity it's the quality I'd like to see improved. Millions of sheep voting their emotions and biases is not healthy for our republic.
At the dawn of the US, voters had to be landowners, didn't they? They actually had to have some skin in the game. Fast forward to today and voters can use the ballot box as a weapon, voting a distribution of wealth from producers to themselves.
I don't propose exclusionary actions against the voting ranks, I just would like to see a more informed electorate. That would be the best defense against collectivism.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/23/2009 @ 12:36pm
At the dawn of the US, voters had to be landowners, didn't they?Posted by freiheit1 at 05/23/2009 @ 12:36pm
Landowners don't produce squat. Think slaves & small freeholders.
Posted by Sorelish at 05/23/2009 @ 12:50pm
At no level does your classist assertion hold true that "landowners don't produce squat".
Only someone who doesn't produce squat, or is very immature could write what you wrote. But your marxist faculty would beam with pride. Good job.
You are no threat to power. They own you.
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/23/2009 @ 3:25pm
Posted by freiheit1 at 05/23/2009 @ 3:25pm
To the contrary. They own you. The multitudes of paper shuffling idiots, of which I believe you to be one, think you're in with the power brokers. You are merely a useful idiot. Good luck with your mortgage & the hypertension attending your uncertain future.
Posted by Sorelish at 05/23/2009 @ 3:52pm
Btw, it's labor that creates value, not title, in relation to the land. No one's urging confiscation, just awareness of that fundamental & the proper remuneration of those who perform said labor.
Posted by Sorelish at 05/23/2009 @ 4:32pm
Btw, it's labor that creates value, not title, in relation to the land. No one's urging confiscation, just awareness of that fundamental & the proper remuneration of those who perform said labor.
Posted by Sorelish at 05/23/2009 @ 4:32pm
The proper renumeration for labor is whatever an employer and employee or contractor agree upon.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/23/2009 @ 9:24pm
Posted by antisocialist at 05/23/2009 @ 9:24pm
Oh that must explain why you're such a devoted advocate of collective bargaining. Try walking into a group of laborers & telling them why it's in their best interest to accept less.
Oh I forgot , your heros have already done that, received a few one finger salutes & moved production overseas. Lots of other gimmicks like selling the company to a conglomerate who lets everybody go,then buying back the production facility & rehiring at minimum wage. I could go on..
They'll just never learn, will they? It's just has to be greed, right?
Posted by Sorelish at 05/23/2009 @ 10:04pm
It is just a real shame that with the greatest downturn in our economy that can be remember by those now living that the illegal alien workers are fleeing the U.S.A. in droves! The percentages are now down 15% and increasing!
I guess that means ACORN will be registaring, counting, and filling in more ballots from the cemetaries of America for the Demoncrats than ever in recorded American history!
Posted by BigPasture at 05/23/2009 @ 10:47pm
Oh that must explain why you're such a devoted advocate of collective bargaining. Try walking into a group of laborers & telling them why it's in their best interest to accept less.
Oh I forgot , your heros have already done that, received a few one finger salutes & moved production overseas. Lots of other gimmicks like selling the company to a conglomerate who lets everybody go,then buying back the production facility & rehiring at minimum wage. I could go on..
They'll just never learn, will they? It's just has to be greed, right?
Posted by Sorelish at 05/23/2009 @ 10:04pm
No, I'm an advocate of individual bargaining.
And if the business you have your career in is sold, moved, or obsolete, it's up to you to make changes, not a union coercion or govt mandates. It's called being an adult. I've had to do it as have millions of others. And we do so without crying for unions or govt handouts.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/23/2009 @ 10:56pm
It's called being an adult.Posted by antisocialist at 05/23/2009 @ 10:56pm
That would explain your present occupation as a part time insurance salesman. Sorry, but macho you're not.
Posted by Sorelish at 05/23/2009 @ 11:16pm
That would explain your present occupation as a part time insurance salesman. Sorry, but macho you're not.
Posted by Sorelish at 05/23/2009 @ 11:16pm
No, I work part-time because I no longer want to work full time at my age. Insurance allows me to do that.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/23/2009 @ 11:42pm
That would explain your present occupation as a part time insurance salesman. Sorry, but macho you're not.
Posted by Sorelish at 05/23/2009 @ 11:16pm
It is always entertaining to see lectures from those in society who obviously have never contributed anything worthwhile other than extremist idealism!
They have probably never worked as youthful laborors 12 on and 12 off 6 days a week in labor intensive construction, farming, industrial to achieve goals of education, to support families etc. ever!
I run a small insurance agency also when not doing manual labor also, maintaining my place, a widowed daughters, and church grounds and with any in need of help all gratis.
Tell us MANCHO FOOLO just what do you do??
Posted by BigPasture at 05/24/2009 @ 09:58am
Posted by BigPasture at 05/24/2009 @ 09:58am
I'll tell you what you'd do. And thats avoid me like the plague lest you walk away in a very shit faced condition.
No insurance salesman ever did any real work in his life. You just gave yourself away, pansy. Try not to get lost in your big open field little petty bourgeois thumb sucker.
Posted by Sorelish at 05/24/2009 @ 10:18am
No insurance salesman ever did any real work in his life. You just gave yourself away, pansy. Try not to get lost in your big open field little petty bourgeois thumb sucker.
Posted by Sorelish at 05/24/2009 @ 10:18am
"No insurance salesman ever did any real work in his life"? What planet are you from? Do you think that we all just went from diapers to selling insurance. Most insurance people have a wide range of backgrounds. Those that are successful in making a career in insurance do so by a lot of hard work and actually caring for their clients. What is especially helpful is having the life experiences to identify with the needs, dreams, and aspirations of your clients.
Posted by antisocialist at 05/24/2009 @ 1:55pm
If someone does not want to be registered to vote, they should not be forced to do so. People should have to be pro-active to register, not passive. If they have no interest in voting, they probably shouldn't.
Posted by pyeatte at 05/24/2009 @ 6:21pm
Posted by Sorelish at 05/24/2009 @ 10:18am | ignore this person | warn this person
Like I said, Tell us MANCHO FOOLO just what do you do?
Posted by BigPasture at 05/24/2009 @ 09:58am | ignore this person | warn this person
Your occupation is probably as silly as your false bluster.
Posted by BigPasture at 05/24/2009 @ 6:58pm
I think KVH is right here; I seriously don't understand the opposition. I guess you could make a "this is a big bureaucracy" argument, but the opposition that's been raised thus far is, if you'll forgive the bluntness, pretty pitiful.
Antisocialist is the only one to offer real arguments, though the fact that the majority of his post consisted of a gigantic ad hominem against KVH should perhaps tell us something. He says the following:
<<We need to make sure all the poor are registered to vote and vote often.>>
The implication is that he objects to one or both of these scenarios. I sincerely hope it isn't the first, because the alternative is "the poor don't get to vote." Clearly, that's bad.
So let's go to the second one, which is the only actually plausible objection he makes. On closer examination, it doesn't really hold any water. Though I agree with him that voter fraud is actually a real live concern, I don't think this would actually increase it. In fact, if you don't put any even alleged "troublemaker" agencies in charge of doing this job, you DECREASE the risk of voter fraud because you eliminate the means by which it can be done. They allegedly do fraud by doing fake registration; if they're not registering people, their teeth are gone.
At best, the voter fraud argument is very low-impact. It seems like having more people who should be voting have the chance to vote is just a good thing.
And that's what I don't get about the opposition. This proposal is literally "So there are these people who should have the opportunity to vote (they're American citizens), we say, reduce the obstacles to them exercising the right to vote."
Posted by Thrawn at 05/24/2009 @ 7:49pm
<i>Posted by snowball666 at 05/25/2009 @ 08:17am </i>
Nice.
Posted by Thrawn at 05/25/2009 @ 09:28am
Automatic voter authentication and the complete reformation of our voting process is warranted... indeed, needed... if we are to rescind our recent trend towards authoritarianism.
The perversion and corruption of our electoral process seems to be a non-issue until a week before any given election... when it is far too late to do anything about it.
There is no logical reason why our digital infrastructure can't handle our one day out of every two years voting security and verification... when it handles millions of cash transactions equitably every day.
The mountain of evidence of voter misrepresentation in America today is displayed as a molehill in today's media... and this has the effect of further deterring and eroding voter confidence in all but the 'ruling class'.
The main issue for me is... anyone elected to public office in a Democracy... by nefarious means... will of necessity be resentful, suspicious and unresponsive to the majority of voters... the people who voted against them...
...and for good reason.
Anyone who resists the complete reform of our Democratically mandated voting 'rights' into a verifiable, transparent, and universal system... probably expects to benefit from the 'short circuiting' of true representation... and is involved in a little something more than 'malicious mischief'.
We are talking about one of the wellsprings of democracy here... sobriety and action on this issue is called for... especially when an election is not on the immediate horizon... in order to insure the widest range of propriety and security.
Posted by ttr at 05/25/2009 @ 09:58am
Ah.
The old "conservatives are the only ones who know what a real day's work is" argument.
So old and tired. Almost as old and tired as this outdated and nonsensical ideology.
It's been my personal experience that whatever one gripes most about (ESPECIALLY in the world of internet blogs where one's mouth/fingers are unrestrained by incoming fists) are the very things affecting the lives of said gripers.
Translation? Chances are that all these "hard working" conservo-lunatics are more likely than not fat pasty office drones with nothing going for them but their pension. That is, as long as it's not spent by their corporate masters before they can collect.
Although it does explain why they're so angry and belligerent, and so ready to blame someone else for their sad and depressing lot in life.
Posted by TexasFlood at 05/25/2009 @ 11:45am
Although it seems that I tend to agree with the conservo-lunatics in regards to the article. Go figure.
If you're too lazy and dumb to go register to vote (and then to follow up by actually VOTING), you don't deserve to vote.
I've been on the poor side of the American working class before, and never did I ever use that as an excuse to not get my ass to the polls and to vote. What a lame, sorry excuse for an argument. Then again I didn't use my predicament as an excuse for insane ignorance either (I believe a previous poster called it "commonsense" LOL!).
Maybe if people spent more time educating themselves instead of waiting for somebody to do it for them, there wouldn't be a need for this discussion? But let me guess...it's somebody else's fault, right? It always is in this country.
It's the mentality of the American people that needs to be adjusted first and foremost, not the system for voter registration.
Posted by TexasFlood at 05/25/2009 @ 11:52am
Obama's first act as president should have been to limit Americans' television consumption to one hour per day.
Posted by TexasFlood at 05/25/2009 @ 11:56am
Happy Memorial Day. Thanks for your service LV and all the rest who served.
Posted by winyahn at 05/25/2009 @ 12:23pm
<i>Posted by TexasFlood at 05/25/2009 @ 11:52am </i>
Haha ironic, I guess, that we end up on the exact opposite sides that one would normally expect.
It seems like the real question here is whether we want to have barriers that inhibit American citizens from voting. Now, clearly we need to have SOMETHING there, because otherwise fraud is almost guaranteed. Having no registration whatsoever would certainly ensure that every American citizen could vote...probably more than once. Clearly we don't want that.
At the same time, though, deliberately creating barriers for the sole purpose of making people jump through hoops just seems bizarre. Though we assuredly want an informed populace, we don't make "being informed" a condition to voting (which is what you're effectively doing). Even if you may have been able to jump through the hoops, a lot of people might not have either the time or education to do so. Why should they denied a say in this system under which they've assumed unique responsibilities (ex: income tax, potential to be drafted) and by whose decisions they will be strongly and directly affected?
There's yet another nasty twist, though. Setting up hoops doesn't even accomplish your goal, for the exact reason you said. Someone might go through the effort to get their papers in and then vote without ever becoming informed.
That means that your position is flawed on two levels. First, it underperforms; individual registration doesn't achieve the goals you've set out. Second, to the extent that it achieves your goals, that's still a harm because those goals are problematic anyway.
Posted by Thrawn at 05/25/2009 @ 3:12pm
Sidenote: by your moniker, may I assume you have some connection to Texas?
Posted by Thrawn at 05/25/2009 @ 3:12pm
Happy Memorial Day. Thanks for your service LV and all the rest who served.
Posted by winyahn at 05/25/2009 @ 12:23pm
thank you Win
Posted by antisocialist at 05/25/2009 @ 4:37pm
by Thrawn at 05/25/2009 @ 3:12pm...
-At the same time, though, deliberately creating barriers for the sole purpose of making people jump through hoops just seems bizarre.-
Yes. Big problem with the 'hoops' is the political agenda of the people holding them... and their 'willingness' to manipulate opposing vote counts. Therein lies a difficulty in today's version of Democracy. The general political awareness of the population is another.
We can do much better... and we should... as our Democratic process sets an example for those countries that could conceivably consider the Democratic process for themselves.
We are, after all... trying to spread democracy all over the globe, are we not?
Most people learn by example.
Posted by ttr at 05/25/2009 @ 6:34pm
When did I ever say anything about "hoops"?
While I'm sure there's room for reform, the system we have right now seems pretty straightforward, and if you register far enough ahead of time (which is the voter's problem and nobody else's) there should be zero problems. The rules are posted, and easy to ascertain. If somebody wants to vote without knowing what they're voting for, that's ALSO their problem.
My only point was that if people spent less time complaining about how difficult registration is, and more time, I don't know...registering to vote??, there wouldn't be nearly the same problem.
Then again this isn't even taking into account the millions and millions of people who flat out don't give a shit who's in office. That's another discussion I suppose.
And no, nothing to do with Texas, I simply have an affinity for the musical stylings of Stevie Ray Vaughan.
Posted by TexasFlood at 05/25/2009 @ 8:16pm
<i>Posted by TexasFlood at 05/25/2009 @ 8:16pm </i>
On Texas...gotcha.
On the merits here...I realize that you never used the word "hoops," but that's basically what you're defending. The only way your argument about laziness makes sense is if you're defending specific steps that you have to go through in order to register.
The rules are...sometimes ascertainable...if you're educated enough and in a place where they're laid out, etc. What I don't understand, though, is why actually going to the polls and voting doesn't demonstrate a high enough level of caring. Since I assume your position isn't "the harder it is to vote, the better," why put up an unnecessary step?
BTW, when I first glanced at this topic, I thought KVH was defending mandatory voting, which is stupid. Thankfully, closer examination revealed that her position seems sensible, if not intuitively good.
Posted by Thrawn at 05/25/2009 @ 9:56pm
Posted by BigPasture at 05/23/2009 @ 10:47pm
Gotta say I'm disappointed. Did I scare away all the other ACORN posts from the right-wingers with my prediction????
heheh
Posted by Mask at 05/26/2009 @ 08:13am
Along with universal voter registration, we ought to have a mandatory federal holiday so that all workers can vote on election days. A lot of working folks don't bother to register because they 1) can't get the time off work to vote, 2) can't afford to miss the time from work to vote.
Voting isn't a problem for salaried workers and most salaried workers make more money than their hourly counterparts. I know this isn't true in all cases, but most hourly paid jobs don't pay as much annually.
Another little tidbit that isn't brought up here is that most of the church going folks vote because their churches like to dabble in the political arena yet hold the tax exempt status. Why not make churches pay taxes and let them rant all the want? As it is, we have to listen to the rantings and ravings of pastors and priests wishing to impose their belief systems upon us. The institutions they represent should be paying taxes since they do indeed seem to have a strong lobby group on their behalf.
So, paid federal holidays for voting days. Taxation of churches and finally better oversight of voter fraud and voter intimidation tactics practiced so frequently throughout the land.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 05/27/2009 @ 10:45am
Hey now. You have NO IDEA what kind of adanced marketing strategies I've needed to employ in order to being up market share and revenue to enhance return to shareholder interest while pimping your mom.
Posted by snowball666 at 05/25/2009 @ 08:17am
You may need to break that down for BP.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 05/27/2009 @ 11:40am
It's okay, everyone, and it's natural to feel as you do. But I have empathy for your affliction.
http://www.morethanfourhours.com/bds
You don't have to bark at the moon any longer.
Posted by PaulSpindrift at 05/27/2009 @ 5:10pm
Wow Texas Flood, you're certainly not angry and belligerent!
http://www.morethanfourhours.com/bds
Posted by PaulSpindrift at 05/27/2009 @ 5:12pm