Aaron Regunberg: Voter ID Leads to Voter Disenfranchisement
Friday, April 27, 2012
On Tuesday I voted in the Presidential Primary. But thanks to Rhode Island’s new voter ID legislation, which requires all voters to show one of a prescribed list of identification cards in order to cast a vote, I easily might not have had this opportunity to exercise one of my fundamental rights as an American.
When I arrived at my polling place, I was asked to show my ID. Curious about how this new process would play out, I asked, “What if I didn’t have an ID?” The poll worker smiled and said, “Well, there’s lots of different IDs you could use.” I pressed, “But what if I didn’t have any of them—if I didn’t have an ID at all?” One of the nearby poll workers joked, “Then you’d be arrested.” I laughed, but after a moment asked again. There was a pause, and then the poll worker responded, “Well, then you couldn’t vote.”
Of course, I had done my research. I knew that this year, as a phasing-in measure, folks without IDs would still be allowed to fill in a provisional ballot. And, anyways, I had just been doing an experiment; fortunately for me, I actually had an ID with me and was able to show it and cast my vote. By luck of the draw, I happen to be in a privileged enough position that this legislation doesn’t really affect me. I’m privileged to have known where to look up the new voting requirements. I’m privileged to have continuous access to the internet, so I could easily find out what exactly I’d need to bring to the polling place in order to vote. I’m privileged to already have an ID, as well as a stable home address to list on it. And if I didn’t have an ID, I’m privileged enough to have the resources to get one without too much difficulty.
These are all privileges that many middle-class folks in my position think of as universally shared. But there are lots of people in our state who aren’t in the privileged situation I have the luck of being in, and given the conversation I had when I voted Tuesday, it seems hard to deny that someone a little less informed than me—but with just as much of a right to vote—could easily have walked out of that polling place disenfranchised. It wouldn’t have been the fault of any individual poll worker or ID-less citizen. Rather, they blame lies on this undemocratic law itself.
The evidence is clear that voter ID laws like these have a disproportionate chance of disenfranchising African Americans, Latinos, seniors, and citizens who are low income or homeless. For example, when the Justice Department investigated Texas’ new voter ID law, it found that a Latino registered voter is at least 46.5 percent, and potentially up to 120.0 percent, more likely than a non-Latino registered voter to lack required forms of identification. Obviously those numbers apply to the Texas population, but it seems fair to assume that similar disproportionately exists in Rhode Island. And that’s not even getting into the populations that have an even more difficult time acquiring an ID, such as the homeless or the very elderly.
After Tuesday’s primary, there were lots of glowing reports of how the new voter ID system went off without any hitches. But only 3 percent of Rhode Island’s registered voters went to the polls Tuesday, and those who did were the most die-hard voters in the state—precisely the folks who are least likely to be affected by this legislation. In an election with greater turnout, the chances of voter disenfranchisement are exponentially higher. And the craziest part is, no advocates of this law anywhere in the country have produced credible evidence that the type of voter fraud prevented by voter ID even exists in any marginally appreciable way.
To paraphrase a recent quote from 60 Minutes’ Andrew Cohen, you can be stupid and vote in America. You can be drunk and vote in America. You can be mentally insane and vote in America. You can vote in America for Snooki, or, like tens of millions of Americans, you can choose to not vote at all. But if you cannot afford the time and money it takes to get a driver’s license or another form of required ID, you’re out of luck. We’re talking about a real affront to our democratic values here, and all I can do is hope that—like previous forms of voter disenfranchisement that have existed in our country—we will someday overcome this too.
Related Articles
- Aaron Regunberg: A Tale of Two Ed Reforms
- Aaron Regunberg: Achievement First has Little Support in Providence
- Aaron Regunberg: Be Fair to Those Who Care
- Aaron Regunberg: Behind the Standardized Test Curtain
- Aaron Regunberg: Brown Needs to Pay Up
- Aaron Regunberg: Do Mayoral Academies Have Something to Hide?
- Aaron Regunberg: History and Education Reform
- Aaron Regunberg: Let’s Make Rhode Island Competitive
Enjoy this post? Share it with others.
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Comments:
Jeffrey deckman
7:07am on Friday, April 27, 2012
Insuring security requires ID's. Ballot integrity is at the core of democracies. Not everything can be simple and convenient.
It's called life.
donatello gori
7:21am on Friday, April 27, 2012
Cry me a river aaron! If voting is that important to people, they will get the required documents to get an ID. I don't see these people struggling to get on the welfare roles.
Chris MacWilliams
8:14am on Friday, April 27, 2012
Mr Regunberg, seniors, minorities, and the disabled make their way about the community every day. AND they are proud to show their proper identification when needed.
Your article infers that these people are a helpless lot!! You should be ashamed of yourself for being so disrespectful and condescending.
David Beagle
8:45am on Friday, April 27, 2012
Painting minorities and the "very elderly" as complete and totally helpless is insulting isn't it? You make it seem like these folks are incapable of breathing without assistance from government. Where are pickets or rallies for the completely helpless?
Mark D
9:27am on Friday, April 27, 2012
The Voter ID Law was judged constitutional. Enough said.
pearl fanch
9:34am on Friday, April 27, 2012
Aaron, Voter fraud is unconstitutional, but has been going on for years. I don't remember you writing any articles about that. I wonder why.
Let's think about it. If a person doesn't have an ID of any kind, do we really want them electing our next politicians anyway?
Aaron Regunberg
9:52am on Friday, April 27, 2012
Hi Pearl. Two quick thoughts on your comments. First of all, I think voter fraud is awful--I just happen to have seen the data (as well as had experience in campaigns) showing that the principal kinds of fraud have nothing to do with ID. Great article by Sgouros about it, which I'll link to, but his main point: vote fraud happens when campaign workers troll retirement housing looking for people to "help" with their absentee ballots, when corrupt officials stuff ballot boxes and falsely check off names from the rolls to cover their tracks, when people maintain a fictitious address, as many city workers used to do in Providence in order to satisfy the residency requirement. There are other varieties, too, but they all have something in common, which is that none of them will be prevented by having you show a drivers license at the polls. (http://www.golocalprov.com/news/tom-sgouros-the-perfect-example-of-dumb-reform/)
In response to your second comment, my answer is an unambiguous and clear, "Yes!" Yes, in a democracy we want everyone to be electing our politicians--particularly those who have the most at stake, which happens to be many of the populations more likely to not have an ID. I think that the perspective you shared is one that many of the legislators who passed this bill have: in effect, that they don't want these people voting anyway, and voter ID is a good way to keep them from doing so. But that seems to me to be the embodiment of an undemocratic system, and certainly reminiscent of other systems we've used in the past to keep some citizens from voting.
John Leahy
9:57am on Friday, April 27, 2012
Aaron, you're wrong on three (3) counts. By allowing individuals to vote Without ID's - you are Disenfranchising every Legally registered voter; and Voters attempting to vote Without ID are given a Provisional Ballot; and third, the State will provide a Free Photo ID to anyone who requests one.
ID's required for: Drivers License, car insurance, and traffic stops by law enforcement; R Rated Movies; Purchase of alcohol; tobacco; firearms; lottery tickets; as well as entrance to casino's if appear under age; purchase of and boarding of airplanes; trains, and cruise ships. ID's required when checking into hotels; entering some nightclubs and bars. Id's required for use of credit cards at supermarkets, retail stores, and cashing checks at banks. ID's required for entrance to SAT, ACT, GMAT, LSAT exams. ID's required for All civil service exams wether Federal or State, to enroll in the US Military, as well as to enroll a child in any public or private school.
ID's are required for participation in every part of every American's society. Not to have an ID, you're hiding from something or someone.
Dave Barry
10:24am on Friday, April 27, 2012
What a long story for a non-issue. There are no people out there without some form of ID. Dis-enfranchisement phone baloney. What is worse....having someone use a provisional ballot or having your vote stolen. Voting is how this country works. A vote is a serious thing and should be safeguareded. One illegal vote is a disgrace. If you are a real American you would care about voter fraud.
john paycheck
11:32am on Friday, April 27, 2012
garbage
Eldridge Grant
1:27pm on Friday, April 27, 2012
Aaron, couple of problems: You state that “if you cannot afford the time and money it takes to obtain a drivers license or other form of required ID, you’re out of luck.” Wrong. The ID’s are free, and Ralph Mollis is making them available in every community. IF you can afford “free”, you’re in luck. And they “can’t afford the time”? The groups you refer to have nothing but time. If they can find the time to get to a polling place to vote, then they can afford the time to get an ID. I’ll ask you the same question I ask everyone who trots out the same weak arguments you have: Name one person who is unable to obtain an ID for voting purposes, and why. Bet you don’t. Because you know as well as I, anyone who does will have to explain why, and a solution to their difficulty will be readily available.
Aaron Regunberg
1:41pm on Friday, April 27, 2012
Hi Eldridge. I'm confused by "the groups you refer to have nothing but time"? Imagine you're working two and a half jobs to make ends meet, or you're a single mother who has to care for her children while holding down a full-time minimum wage job, etc. etc. etc.. Now let's assume, for argument's sake, that you happen to by some lucky chance even hear that Mollis is coming to town for an afternoon to hand out free IDs--which, by the way, you're probably never going to hear...it takes a lot to inform everyone in the state of something like that (and by the way, they're using your tax dollars to fund that outreach campaign). Of course, it happens to be during one of your work shifts, and you know your boss won't let you out. Or that's the time you have to pick your kids up and you can't afford childcare in the afternoon. Or a hundred and one other reasons that not everyone has as much flexibility as you or I might. You might not know folks like this, but rest assured there are lots of them in our state, and again, they have just as much of a right to vote as you do.
Chris MacWilliams
2:01pm on Friday, April 27, 2012
@Aaron this busy hypothetical person must have a driver's license to get to work and to pick up the kids. Driver's license is a good ID for voting
Aaron Regunberg
2:07pm on Friday, April 27, 2012
Sorry, why must they? I think this is a good example of folks assuming privilege--there are thousands of Rhode Islanders who don't have a car, who have to use public transportation to get to work.
Mary Jane
2:54pm on Friday, April 27, 2012
Wow, Aaron. I've read a handful of your articles before, but you have truly outdone yourself with this one. This is absurdly trivial!
Your example a few posts up is really grasping at straws. Look, I understand that you're concerned about the mere *possibility*that this policy may bar a citizen from practicing his right to vote. But this possibility is truly infinitesimally small and really does not warrant any attention. First of all, the vast majority of citizens have IDs. Secondly, a state ID costs $15 in RI (if you're under 59--otherwise it's free!). So your sob story above only applies to the class of under-60, ID-less people who (a) cannot spare $15 and (b) do not have the freedom in their everyday lives to take advantage of an opportunity to procure a ID card for free. I find it incredibly unlikely that anybody at all exists who falls in both of these categories--much more unlikely than the (already small) possibility of voter fraud that the implementation of this policy would prevent.
I understand that you think you're looking out for people. But your attitude is incredibly condescending, as people above pointed out, and frankly reeks of privileged guilt. Don't get me wrong: I think you're a bright kid who is truly determined to make a positive difference in the world. But it seems to me that you are so disconnected from the class of people for whom you are trying to help that your efforts are often misguided. You feel so guilty about having been born in fortunate circumstances, it seems, that you take it upon yourself to raise a hubbub whenever anything happens that can be construed as even potentially threatening to anyone less fortunate than yourself--but more often than not, this results in your focusing your attention on non-issues.
The bottom line is: I do think that you can be a force of good in the world, so please try to be a bit more discretionary with respect to what issues you take on. At the rate you're going, you're really cheating yourself of credibility. Focus on more fundamental systemic flaws than silly stuff like this, and you'll make some real change. Good luck!
Aaron Regunberg
3:04pm on Friday, April 27, 2012
Mary, I appreciate the encouragement, and thanks for the reasonable tone. Please understand that my focus on this issue is not because I love complaining so much that I want to find something trivial to talk about. This really is not a trivial issue. I think we can see proof of that in how the national Democratic party is going to such lengths and spending so much money fighting these laws--whatever one might think of them, they don't waste their campaign resources unless they think it's necessary, and clearly they think this is enough of a threat to keep Democratic-leaning voters from the polls to invest in it.
Can I ask one favor of you? Follow this link to a page from the NYU law school that really lays out the case for how many people these laws can affect. All the data and studies are there and documented for you to look through to see if they're legit or not. I think you'll find it eye-opening--it might not convince you, but at least I think it'll prove that this isn't some crazy made-up guilt trip. Thanks in advance for checking it out!
http://www.brennancenter.org/blog/archives/debunking_misinformation_on_photo_id/
Mary Jane
3:07pm on Friday, April 27, 2012
Hi again,
Thanks for getting back to me so quickly and for the link! I'll certainly check it out, but I've already taken too long for my lunch break, so I'll have to get back to you later.
Eldridge Grant
3:35pm on Friday, April 27, 2012
If you’re working two and a half jobs, you already have an ID. Name someone who is, who doesn’t. And now your argument is they won’t “hear about” where to get an ID? Please. They know when the election is, who’s running, what the issues are, and are evidently “flexible” enough to get to the polling place, but somehow never hear about the ID requirement, or where to get one, and don’t have the time to get one anyway. But they can get to the voting booth. You can drone on about the hypothetical single mother with three jobs and a mean boss and child care bills, but, like your story about your poll experience, it’s anecdotal and proves nothing. You ignored the question once, so I’ll ask it again: Name one person who cannot obtain an ID and why. I have yet to hear one person claim they can’t. The fact is what you call “privileged” is actually “responsible” If you wish to exercise your right to vote, then you’re going to have to accept the responsibility of obtaining an ID. An ID is required for far less important things. And it’s not the least bit unreasonable to require people who want to vote in our elections to furnish proof that they are eligible to do so.
john paycheck
4:02pm on Friday, April 27, 2012
brennan study, "there are lies, damn lies and statisitics..."
America used to be the land of oppurtunity.citizens believed you could attain anything in life if you worked hard enough at it and wanted it bad enough.
if these folks want to vote bad enough, they will find a way to get their id. at some point in the next 6 months, they have to find the time to accomplish this.
and quite frankly, they could pick up the phone and call any democrat office holder in the state and they will pick you up at home and take you wherever you need to go to get your id.
E.J. Dunn
7:01pm on Friday, April 27, 2012
Stop shilling for Eric Holder, Mr. Regunberg. Voter IDs are available for free but for the laziest and most dishonest people.
Joseph Bernstein
9:45pm on Friday, April 27, 2012
Aaron-Voter fraud of all kinds takes place,including voting by non-citizens.I arrested people for voting as non-citizens before you were born(1982-??)and they went to Federal prison.
One needs to prove citizenship to get a passport and you think that's more important than voting?
Try buying a gun without ID-oh,that's a different story,hmmm?
Please spare us references to Sgouros,thaat left wing tool.
Joseph Bernstein
11:00pm on Friday, April 27, 2012
BTW Aaron-you are really THE one to lecture us on people having hard lives too distracted or busy to get ID.
Where'd you learn about a hard time?North Shore Country Day and Brown?Sounds like you've had a nice privileged little life and feel justified to pontificate to the rest of us who MIGHT just not have had it as easy.
pearl fanch
8:30am on Sunday, April 29, 2012
You're wrong again Aaron. I do NOT want these people voting for our next policians, if they have no knowledge of the issues, candidates or policies.
The same goes for not wanting a mailman performing surgery on my child, or a daycare provider rebuilding the transmission in my car.
If they don't have an ID, there's a reason. Simple as that. If your job was to create contraversy, you've done well.
Joseph Bernstein
3:57pm on Sunday, April 29, 2012
The very poor,which includes people of all races,generally receive some assistance,and therefore already have ID.Who doesn't?Maybe some very old people,but illegal aliens is what I'm thinking of-the people Aaron and his cohorts refer to as "undocumented workers"-a term with zero legal meaning-and they aren't "immigrants"either-immigrants are documented.It's just their way of trying to influence the election by having unqualified people vote-anything else they say is a lie.GOLocal sure seems complicit in this-Martha Yager,Regunberg,Sgouros,etc.-all birds of a feather.
Gary Arnold
11:20am on Monday, April 30, 2012
You can thank the "Great Divider", Pres Obama, for this new initiative. He has disenfranchised over 50% of the citizens because they are not poor enough, destitute or just plain haven't giving up yet. We have a plague upon us from the White House.
The class warfare is just not acceptable.
Tony Pelliccio
4:08pm on Monday, April 30, 2012
And more to the point, you can go to the Secretary of State's office and obtain an ID for free.
Now here's the thing that irks me. They implemented Voter ID to combat fraud. But looking at the list of things you can use to obtain a SoS issued Voter ID, I note that there are a number of items in the list that could be easily faked.
I also know that most of the fraud was eliminated with the roll out of the state Central Voter Registration Systems in 2006.
So this tells me two things. The first is that the purpose of the Voter ID requirement has nothing to do with fraud and everything to do with voter disenfranchisement. It also tells me that if anything, they've increased the opportunities for potential fraud with the law as it exists now.