|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics |
|
November 17, 2004Voter turnoutHere is the final tally from Minnesota. This year's turnout represented 77.72 percent of the estimated population of eligible voters, tops in the nation -- and well ahead of second-place Wisconsin's 73.7 percent -- but short of the Minnesota high of 83.15 percent achieved in 1956, when 1.6 million people voted. The only other higher showing since records were first kept in 1950 was 79.39 percent in 1960. . .If there is a good argument why there should not be same-day registration, I have not heard it. Yet, to the best of my knowledge, only six states allow it. This was our second election at our current address. This year, when we went to the polls, I was on the voter roll, but my wife was inexplicably absent. She had been looking forward to casting her vote this year for a long time, and same day registration saved the election judges at that polling place from having a very bad day. Comments
If there is a good argument why there should not be same-day registration, I have not heard it. Fraud. An objection that can be at least partially overcome by actually requiring positive ID with current address at time of voting. (A good idea for ALL voters, IMHO.) Work overload--an extra step in the process that can greatly slow down voting if too many people are registering on the spot, especially during heavy turnout. The polls are staffed with volunteers, and often there aren't enough of them even without adding a new step. Posted by: Tully at November 18, 2004 12:51 AMI agree with the fraud potential. I observed polls inside the city of Richmond here in Virginia back in the '90s, and I've seen with my own eyes people vote, leave, and return a few hours later, at the same precinct, wearing the same clothes, to try to vote again. (Fortunately, the officers of election turned them back without any prompting.) I think that ID should be required of all voters, but that may be a distinct issue from same day registration. Some of the election reform proposals floating around include providing a free federal voter ID card for federal elections, to circumvent the protests that lower-income (often Democratic voters) would be disenfranchised if forced to obtain a fee-based state-issued ID. Posted by: The Jaded JD at November 18, 2004 07:47 AMThat about covers it, doesn't it? People should be allowed to vote, but not allowed to cheat. I agree with establishing a voter ID sytem of some type. We should be able to find a reasonable way to allow people to register and vote same day, and also a way to make cheating really hard. And the solution requires making the choice in favor of IDs. Or if the people decide that anonymity is especially important to avoid intimidation etc, they they have to be wllling to also accept other bureaucratic mechanisms that prevent the sort of fraud that anonymity enables. It's really that simple. Frankly, as time goes by, I have a hard time seeing the value in some sort of vaguely expressed right to anonymity. Seems to me it's usually rooted either in paranoia or disingenuousness. Of course, I might feel different if they were after ME. :-) Posted by: bk at November 18, 2004 09:27 AMOh, BTW Todd, hats off to all Minnesotans. The state should be very proud to generate such numbers. They are putting the other states to shame. It might be fun if state governors had bets about turnouts instead of just for sports teams. I think a campaign to increase turnout by invoking state pride could be kind of fun. It's too bad that increasiung turnout is viewed as more favorable to democrats, maybe this election will put a dent in that. I just think everyone should vote, and that they shoudl view it as an important enough thing to make themselves familiar with what's going on. Posted by: bk at November 18, 2004 09:32 AMThere is also a more philosophical argument against things like same-day registration that some conservatives will make. Basically, the argument is that voting should be a considered act by people with some involvement in the process and knowledge of the issues. Same-day registration and other similar things bring in more people who don't really know much about the issues and whose vote isn't well informed. If people don't care enough to meet the rather minimal requirements necessary to register in advance, why should we beg them to vote? In general, as someone mentioned several weeks ago on this blog, this is a basic philosophical difference between conservatives and liberals. Of course, in practice, it often gets down to which side benefits from higher turnout (and, as this election showed, that is by no means obvious anymore). Posted by: MWS at November 18, 2004 09:35 AMTrue, Marc. I've made the argument that those who can't be bothered to intelligently exercise the franchise are those whose votes won't be seriously missed--but I have no desire to STOP them from voting, just to make them obey basic rules meant to prevent fraud and abuse. Whenever I hear the cry "Let every vote be counted" my knee-jerk reaction is "Let every LEGAL vote be counted, and prosecute illegal voters!" Posted by: Tully at November 18, 2004 11:03 AMI'd have no great objection to same-day registration if it were coupled with requiring photo ID--driver's license or state ID card and one or two other forms of ID, same as you have to give to write a check in most businesses. Otherwise the argument against it is that it encourages fraud. It also can make it possible for someone to just import a bunch of young people from another state into your state just to vote for candidate X, which apparently some groups have tried in those six states with same-day registration. Posted by: Dean Esmay at November 18, 2004 04:50 PMI don't recall ever hearing allegations of fraud. Here is the MN statute: 201.061 Registration on or before election day. (1) presenting a driver's license or Minnesota (2) presenting any document approved by the secretary of (3) presenting one of the following: (i) a current valid student identification card from a (ii) a current student fee statement that contains the (4) having a voter who is registered to vote in the For tribal band members living on an Indian reservation, an A county, school district, or municipality may require that |
Archives
March 2006
February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Dubai Out
Why So Long Between Democracies? Round One, Centrism Rock Lobster? Blackwell Releases "Worst-Treated" List "IRV" used in Burl., VT for mayor election. Great idea! Random Thread Election 2006: Round One A Proper Multiculturalism Bush proposes line item veto act - what's changed?
|