Resolution: Executive GOP Committee Member Admits Motive on the Daily Show

I recently saw the video on the Daily Show of Don Yelton (an executive GOP committee member) speak about the Voter ID bill. He blatantly affirmed that this law was intended to “kick the Democrats in the butt”. Yelton also had mentioned that he was perfectly content if this law prevents “lazy blacks” or “lazy college kids” from voting. 

When I had concluded this blog I had confirmed that the Photo ID requirement would not suppress the vote and it is unknown what the effect of other aspects of the bill would have (elimination of same day registration, reduction in early voting, prohibition of college IDs).

However.

I had always given the Republicans the benefit of the doubt of their intentions. The group consistently said that this was put in place to “ensure integrity” in the electoral process. Now that Yelton made his remarks, I have every reason to believe that this has a partisan purpose. It is obvious that their intention is to prevent all Democrats from voting so they can win elections.

The Irony: Blacks are one of the most motivated groups in the country to vote. To say they are lazy- particularly on the topic of voting- is just not accurate. They voted at higher rates than whites in 2012. Also, I don’t believe that “lazy college kids” exist. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be spending hours on end studying to get our degrees. We don’t have time to organize documents and obtain ID cards at the DMV simply to vote. The assertions that he made are actually quite offensive.

What everyone can take from this: The Republicans in North Carolina are openly trying to win elections through unethical ways. 

Blog Roll

Here is a list of blogs that I have read over the past few weeks to keep up with the issue- either on my own time or specifically for this project:

Dailyshow.com
Breitbart.com
Dailykos.com
HuffingtonPost.com
WashingtonPost.com
MSNBC.com
CNN.com
Foxnews.com

Some are conservative and some are liberal. Part of what I wanted to accomplish with this project was to understand other people’s viewpoints, so reading a diverse group of blogs was a good stepping stone in order to accomplish that. 

Growth as a Thinker

When I first started writing this blog, I had already formed views on the Voter ID issue. I firmly believed that it was a blatant attempt to suppress the vote of minorities, the elderly, and students in the state of North Carolina. After reviewing the issue and immersing myself in the issue, I have become more moderate and understanding of the other side’s viewpoint.

In the bill, the specific portion that I reversed my views on was the adoption of the Voter ID requirement. I previously believed that mandating a ID card to vote would suppress the vote, but statistics show that it does not. At the same rate, there is evidence that in-person voter fraud is non-existent, therefore, I still believe requiring an ID to vote in arbitrary and unnecessary.

Other aspects of the bill- like the reduction in early voting, prohibition on students using their college ID, and elimination of same-day registration I am still against. These items are unprecedented at the extreme way that is presented in the North Carolina legislation. Additionally, they do not relate to the initial problem that led to the creation of this bill, in-person voter fraud.

I have grown as a thinker by writing a blog on the Voter ID bill. I have learned to understand other people’s positions while still holding my own. I have also learned that you should not blindly take information from media as valid. It is important to research issues like these on your own, so you can have an actual informative opinion. While, I am still against the bill, I am against it for different reasons than I was previously.  These include: it’s arbitrary nature, reducing citizen’s incentive to vote, and having symbolic societal regression.

Class Links

http://105education.wordpress.com/

 I followed this blog throughout the course of the project and I very much enjoyed reading it. It gave great insight onto issues within the education debate: a merit system for rewarding teachers, teacher pay, cuts in education, and much more. I also found the perspective very intriguing given that their mother is a public school teacher (noted in the introduction). The one particular article on school vouchers was very informative. I had not known that private schools were being almost indirectly subsidized money via vouchers in the education system. If you are looking for a blog that tackles controversial issues on the topic of education, check this one out!

 http://ncandguns.wordpress.com/

 This blog entails information on the gun debate.  Even though I disagreed with some of the stances this blog took on the issues, I enjoyed reading it to give myself more insight into other people’s beliefs on guns. The writer made a strong stand in the analysis saying “America was formed with its second amendment as the right to bear arms, and I support North Carolina’s effort to, safely, make this amendment a major part of North Carolina culture.” One post that caught my attention was about the new law that permits students to leave firearms in their cars on campus. This is very interesting especially if you are a student at a public university.

 http://votingid.wordpress.com/

Lastly, I read this blog throughout the course of the project. It centered on the same issue that my blog had- the voter ID law. The writer was specific and focused on the effects of the actual voter ID requirement in the bill. Something in particular that wasn’t mentioned in my blog was the effect the North Carolina legislation has on other states. In his blog, he highlights the domino effects that have occurred as other states are passing Voter ID bills. To read into even more information and perspective on the voter ID bill, this would be a great source to look into. 

 

Links Posting

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/30/us/north-carolina-voting-lawsuit/

Here is an article that goes further in-depth on the Justice Department suing the state over the Voter ID law. I not only looked at this article, but other articles from CNN.com as well. It appeared to be a mostly neutral and strong source of information on this issue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xxo221-W9Q

This is a link to the statement that was made by North Carolina Governor, Pat McCrory in the wake of his signature on the Voting Law. I find listening to the politicians who make the decisions useful, because some of the time their words are twisted in the process of going through the media. In the video, he gave his perspective on how he believes this law protects the integrity of our elections.

Politico.com

Politico is a great website to find more detailed oriented information about the voting ID law. It’s website is based entirely off of political issues. It is also very neutral in its stances.

http://www.dailykos.com/

The DailyKos is a blog to read if you are looking for more of a liberal viewpoint on the issue. It is obviously bias, but presents good points for one side of the argument.

http://www.breitbart.com/

Similarly to the DailyKos, Breitbart.com is a blog to check out for people looking for more of a conservative viewpoint. Even though I disagreed with the stances on this website, I found it interesting to check it out and immerse myself in another person’s viewpoint.

http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2013/Bills/House/PDF/H589v8.pdf

Here is the link to the bill. This serves as a useful source when to find out about a specific aspect of it.

Implications

The issue could possibly culminate in court, with the Justice Department suing the state over the law. I predict the court will overturn certain aspects of the law- such as the elimination of same day registration, reduction in early voting, and preventing college students from using their university ID’s, but requiring an ID will stand for its previous supreme court precedents.

The future of the polarization over this issue will remain stable for a while, and then will fade if it does not get resolved. If the law falls, liberals will be satisfied, but conservative opinion will not initially change and vice versa. A bipartisan solution will not be reached on this issue, because no party appears to have any intent of reaching one. But regardless of what happens, strong opinions about the voter ID requirement will diminish, because everyone will eventually get an ID. This issue will direct its attention to the root of the problem- certain provisions of the Voting Rights Act being struck down by the Supreme Court.

How the Bill Affects College Students

College students, listen up! You are now subjects in the debate on the Voter ID bill just passed this summer by the North Carolina legislature. Some say it prevents students from voting while others say it’s a necessary measure. Here I will break down the effects that it will have on all students.

First, let me start with the in-state students. All the instate students who have a driver’s license will be virtually unaffected by this bill. If you do not have a driver’s license, you will have to obtain a voter ID card at some point before the election or vote by absentee ballot.

Out-of-State students have a different situation. For the next election cycle, out-of-state students who move within 90 days of November 4^th (like most first year students) will be able to use their out-of-state drivers license. Every other out-of-state student will have to obtain North Carolina identification. This wouldn’t seem like a particular problem, except to obtain the ID, you need other forms of ID- like a birth certificate, social security card, etc. Most college students in general leave those at home. The other option for out-of-state students is to vote by absentee ballot.

While I do believe that college students will still have the opportunity to vote, this law definitely makes it more difficult for some students. The obvious solution is to allow students to present their university ID, which has a photo and name, but the General Assembly did not allow this to happen in their bill.  Additionally, when this law was just a bill, some NC legislators floated the idea of adding a provision that would eliminate tax deductions of up to $2500 for families of student’s who vote at their university. Luckily, this was never passed or added.

While I find most of this law as an honest attempt to ensure integrity in the voting process, I believe the way this bill affects students is a blatant attempt to prevent us from voting.

UPDATE: outside links added to post

Theory: Trying to Find a Solution

            To bring an end to this polarization and disagreement on the issue, a bipartisan solution must be reached that puts more integrity in our election system, while not suppressing the vote. In my analysis post, I noted the lack of cooperation on a solution, but here I will be able to show that there is a way both sides can get what they want.

            Technology has come far in the past years- even with electronic voting. Some cell phones have a feature that requires a fingerprint in order to access the phone. This could be a possible solution. When voters register, they could electronically record their fingerprint. Then, when they reach the polls on Election Day they could only gain access to voting via fingerprint. Given how rapidly technology has changed our lives, this could be a realistic solution.

            Requiring a photo ID in order to vote has become so contentious through the fall of a specific portion of the Voting Rights Act that allows states to implement these sorts of laws. I believe liberals have overplayed their hand on the issue. They have spoke to a tone of threatening democracy- which one would expect for a bill that shows significant evidence of suppressing the vote. Conservatives have made this issue argumentative when they framed the bill as “insuring validity of the voting process”, when in actuality, it could possibly have reverse affects. Ultimately, both sides appeared to distort the true reality. 

Voter Fraud.

As I wrote about in my Analysis, there is no evidence of in-person voter fraud in the State of North Carolina. Voter fraud is generally the main argument that comes from the right, but statistics show that the cases are so minuscule, it would never affect an election. I would like to reiterate that sentiment in this blog post and prove that this so called “voter fraud” is simply not a real problem in the state.

Before I get started, I want to distinguish between voter fraud and voter impersonation. Voter Fraud (also called electoral fraud) is intentionally misrepresenting or interfering with the results of an election. This can done by the voter or by the administrators of the voting process. Voter impersonation, a branch of voter fraud, occurs when someone claims the identity of another voter as his or her own in order to vote. When Republicans or conservatives claim this fights voter fraud, what they really mean is that the Photo ID requirement fights voter impersonation.

Statistics show that there were 86 cases of voter fraud in North Carolina from 2000 to 2010. However, at the national level, there were only 10 cases of voter impersonation (or in-person voter fraud) from 2000. This is significant because the photo ID requirement only stops voter impersonation- it does nothing about voter fraud in general.

When you examine this law, many of the consequences of it are unknown. After observing the outcome of the Georgia Voter ID law though, it is reasonable to assume the photo ID requirement will not cause voter suppression. However, when Republicans and conservatives claim this issue fights “voter fraud”, they are misleading. Some conservatives hide under the premise that the in-person voter fraud goes unaccounted, but unless they can prove this, it appears to be a blind assertion.

Analysis on the Photo ID Requirement of the Law

In 2013, Governor Pat McCrory signed into law a controversial piece of legislation resulting in numerous changes in the voting process. Among the changes, voters will now have to present a government-approved photo ID, as this is aimed at reducing voter fraud. The controversy stems from the notion that while presenting an ID, this will suppress the vote. While I do not believe the requirement will cause voter suppression or reduce voter fraud, at a principle level, it is bad for the state for its regression, reduction in voter incentive while not addressing the current voter turnout problem, and arbitrary nature and political motive.

By passing this requirement, the North Carolina General Assembly took a step back on the progress that has been made on the Voting Rights issue. This law inches back to the days of discrimination- as African Americans disproportionately do not have proper ID and are therefore disproportionately affected by the new requirement than other groups. Estimates show that there are around 506,000 people in the state of North Carolina lacking correct ID. While African Americans make up 22% of the electorate, they represent 31% of the people lacking ID. Whites on the other hand make up 71% of the electorate, but only represent 57% of the voters without ID. It is regressive in nature to implement a law that affects one group (especially on the variable of race) more than another.

Discrimination is not only bad for each individual citizen, but it is bad for the society as a whole. Society works best in unison, and when racial discrimination takes place, factions emerge. As a country, we have historically expanded access to the franchise as movements and groups of people demanded the right to vote. This was seen when we gave minorities, women, and 18-21 year olds access to the franchise. The current situation can be seen as unusual, as the access to the ballot box is becoming more difficult with a longer process of obtaining identification. In the civil rights era, when African Americans had the right to vote, it did not hold much value- particularly in southern areas. Jim Crow laws were implemented to prevent African Americans from voting and having a strong voice in our democracy. Requiring a presentation of photo ID to vote is not the equivalent of establishing a poll tax or having a literacy test (As Jim Crow laws did), but it is certainly putting barriers that must be over come to vote. As a progressive society, it is in our interests to avoid these certain types of laws to ensure that those who have had historically no access to the franchise will still be able to make aware their opinion in our democracy. As Hillary Clinton once said, “Voting is the most precious right of every citizen, and we have a moral obligation to ensure the integrity of our voting process.”

When the photo ID requirement takes effect, it will put a reduction in the citizens’ drive to vote and does nothing to address the current voter participatory problem. As the Georgia Voter Law indicated, however, requiring identification is not at a level in which people will stop voting, but it still reduces the overall incentive. And by this, I ultimately mean people will become less enthusiastic about participating in our democracy. At 57.5%, the United States ranks 58^th on the voter participation rate around the globe. As this law implements, I believe that it will prevent any new voters from engaging in the political process. Nate Silver was quoted saying, “Many of the people who do not have identification are not registered to vote- or if they are registered, they are unlikely to turn out.” This quote exemplifies the need for more people to participate in the democracy, and this law does nothing but keep that problem active.

The government should be passing laws that will encourage voting. Society benefits when a democracy is more involved in the issues, and citizens benefit individually by casting their opinion. The Voter ID requirement involves citizens putting in much more effort to vote than was previously needed. For example, if a voter does not have an ID, they must obtain one before Election Day. This process involves assembling other identification documents and filling out an application. If a birth certificate or social security card is misplaced, then a new one is needed. The cost of replacing one of these documents can be burdensome to those who are economically disadvantaged to begin with. Not only is the cost a factor in this issue, but also the time becomes an object. As a person who is of eligible age to vote, if I had to spend an extended period of time just for the ability to vote, I would reconsider from doing so.

Lastly, the new photo ID requirement at the polls holds an arbitrary and political motive to it. From a statistical standpoint, there is no threat of voter fraud impinging the integrity of our elections. Statistics show that there have been 86 cases of actual in person voter fraud from the years 2000-2010- out of over 300 million votes casted. These statistics are insignificant and have not swayed an election.

The old saying “If it’s not broken, don’t fix it,” is very applicable to this requirement. There is absolutely no significant problem of voter fraud in the state, yet the legislators committed themselves to the issue. After the Supreme Court ruling on the Voting Rights Act, states in the south were able to pass laws to change election processes without federal approval. North Carolina did this, and because there was no actual problem of voter fraud, it makes me wonder what their exact motive is. Those on the left believe the motive was to suppress the votes of minorities- which happen to be strong constituencies for the democrats, and those on the right reiterate that it was aimed at preventing voter fraud.  Because the law will neither suppress the vote nor eliminate the non-existent voter fraud, I see this law as an issue that Republicans have used to energize their constituencies and expand their base. It is very popular in the state and the country. Polls show that 96% of Republicans and 86% of independents support the North Carolina Voter ID law.

Requiring a photo ID at the polls has caused a significant controversy in the state. Both political sides claim that the other has false motives. Ultimately though, this legislation will not reduce voter fraud or cause voter suppression, but it is a bad piece of legislation for being regressive, reducing incentive while ignoring the low voter participatory problem, and for its arbitrary passing and political motive.

UPDATE: Corrected grammatical errors- Citizens benefit individually…; Republicans have used to energize…; I believe it is bad… [omitted]