Wheatley: Let Them Vote

By Louis Wheatley, Staff Columnist

Published on Friday, June 29, 2012

  • Print
  • Report an Error

Although I’ve only been of voting age for two years of my life, I haven’t missed an election yet, either local or federal. I am probably in the upper echelons of motivated voters, so I had a moment of near panic when I realized my absentee ballot was going to be mailed to my Hinman Box while I was on the other side of the world in Buenos Aires. To make matters worse, the voter registration deadline was in two days. I might have given up hope, had I not been registered to vote in Oregon. If only others were as lucky as me.

Oregon makes an especially concerted effort to encourage voter participation. It was the first state to switch entirely to a postal voting system — that is, vote by mail. With the ballot delivered right to my door, I have plenty of time to read about the issues and mull over my ballot until I’m ready to mail it back in. It couldn’t be easier, and the state’s voter turnout proves that it works — 85.7 percent of eligible voters cast ballots in 2008.

Then I realized that it is possible to register to vote online in Oregon. I updated my mailing address online and, just like that, my ballot was internationally air mailed at no cost to me. I received my ballot a week before the election, but then stumbled across a new problem: The Argentinean postal service was a chaotic mess, as I discovered when a postcard took four weeks to reach my grandparents. I was worried that my ballot would never make it out of South America, but I shouldn’t have been surprised that Oregon was ready for anything. As an overseas voter, my ballot came with a secrecy waiver that allowed me to scan my ballot and email it in. And just in case I had any questions, there was a Skype name I could call to video chat with a staffer at my local county elections office.

Not all states are like Oregon, or even close. In the last five years, new Republican majorities in state legislatures across the country have enacted stringent electoral laws that toughen the rules for registration and voting. These efforts include presenting photo identification at the polling booth and cutting early voting periods. The main motivation behind these laws is ostensibly to combat voter fraud, which Republicans vilify as a massive civil plague. Gov. Rick Scott, R-Fla., recently attempted to mandate that signed voter registration forms be returned to the state within 48 hours of being filled. Furthermore, he is battling with the U.S. Department of Justice to purge Florida’s voter rolls of dead citizens and non-citizens in a high-risk fashion that threatens to remove legal voters from the list just before the November elections.

The Supreme Court affirmed in 2008 that a state has the right to ask for photo identification as a prerequisite to voting because the state’s obligation to prevent voter fraud outweighs a citizen’s burden in acquiring the identification. But the nonpartisan Brennan Center for Justice at New York University found that voter fraud did not exceed .001% in any state without such burdensome laws. Though the Supreme Court rightly affirms that the state has the responsibility to guarantee fair elections, the threat of widespread voter fraud is a myth. Moreover, these electoral laws disproportionately affect citizens who are low-income, elderly and disabled, many of whom also tend to support the Democratic Party.

Next year, the Supreme Court will review a provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that requires the federal government to oversee election proceedings in states and counties, primarily in the South, that have historically disenfranchised certain groups of their voting rights. While these jurisdictions argue that the days of the Confederacy and institutional racism have passed, it appears that voter disenfranchisement survives throughout the country even today, albeit in a different form, and that these localities would be at a high risk to follow suit. Between the Citizens United decision and the gerrymandering of electoral districts, there is already enough to be concerned about when it comes to the state of our representative democracy. Even if we are only left with a vote as a symbol, a statement that some of us are still here and still care, let us keep that right to vote. We have made great strides in the past century to share the privilege of voting with disenfranchised members of our society. Now is not the time to step backwards.

Comments

“Let Them Vote” Let who vote? Let anyone vote? Disregard the laws that require a person to be a legal resident of the jurisdiction in which they vote? Disregard, discourage or ignore the requirement to prove your identity when you vote? Lawlessness in voting for a supposed lawful society has to be thrown out the window if you want the people who are not legally eligible to vote, to vote because you know more of them will vote the way you want them to vote than will vote against your position? This column is a call for fraud. “Let them vote (illegally) because I say so.”

By on Jun 29 | 12:35 pm

If Yankee Stadium is allowed to require photo ID to buy a beer at a baseball game, surely it isnt too much to ask voters for ID when we let them choose the leader of the free world. Even if you’re poor you can always get a non-driver photo ID at the DMV. Requiring photo identification to vote doesn’t disenfranchise anyone but the absolute laziest members of society.

By on Jun 30 | 1:37 pm

The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University is about as “nonpartisan” as the Tea Party. Check its web site. It is a proud and effective advocate for causes that Democrats embrace. Nothing wrong with that, but an op-ed writer who suggests that they are impartial is either naive or purposely misleading his readers.

By on Jul 2 | 1:21 pm

I think it is interesting to note, as a student here in New Hampshire, that the Voter ID bill which passed in June (by the nearly 3 to 1 Republican majority in the State House overturning Governor Lynch’s veto) will in the future no longer accept Student IDs as adequate proof of identity when voting. This legislation clearly targets students specifically, especially students who cannot afford to drive or travel overseas, and therefore do not have driver’s licences and passports.

By on Jul 5 | 4:12 pm

Comments are closed on this article.

Most Viewed | Latest Comments

  1. Water pong banned, risks of overhydrating cited
  2. Security reports increase over Green Key revelry
  3. ASAP Rocky draws crowd of 3,000
  4. Alumni Council talks campus climate issues
  5. TTLG: We are all enough
  6. The man. The myth. The legend. The Lodj.
  7. Arson suspected in Chi Gam fire
  8. Steinberg '88 examines the admissions process
  9. Albrecht: A Failure of Values
  10. Cuban sophomore agitates against Castro regime