photo id

Republicans just can't figure out what they want to do with young voters.

We see some momentum behind actually courting young people, which Sarah discusses in her most recent post. Conservative media outlets like Fox News, the National Review, and the Washington Examiner, are hot on Margaret Hoover's book (the great-granddaughter of Depression-inducing President Herbert Hoover), which argues that Millennials are sympathetic to the fundamental principles of conservatism and that the GOP should accordingly engage these young people. Sarah does a pretty good job of explaining why Hoover is misguided in her analysis, but the GOP establishment seems to be embracing her argument. And you know what? The civic engagement-enthusiast in me doesn't necessarily mind that; at least young people appear to be the target of some kind of outreach effort.

But while Hoover is feeling the love from conservative media, Republican officials across the country are doing everything they can to keep young people from exercising their rights as citizens. In the name of eradicating voting fraud (there are 44 one-millionths of one percent of votes impacted by voter fraud), these Republicans are actively intimidating and restricting the rights of the very same Millennials Hoover wants to attract to the Republican ranks.

The latest example? Maine Republican Party Chairman Charlie Webster, who is apparently clueless on election law.

Maine Republican Party Chairman Charlie Webster is claiming that college students who pay out-of-state tuition rates and vote in state are committing voter fraud.

At a press conference at the Maine State House, Webster gave the media a list of over 200 students -- their names redacted -- who paid out-of-state tuition rates but were registered to vote in the state.

[...]

...Webster provided absolutely zero evidence that the students -- the vast majority of whom were born in the late 80s and early 90s, based on Webster's list -- voted both in their home state and in Maine.

Webster doesn't understand that just because students are not originally from Maine does not mean that they aren't afforded the right to participate in the community where they live (provided they do not vote in their home state and in Maine). The Sun Journal, a Maine newspaper covering the story, describes it well.

According to Maine state law, students are eligible to register to vote in the municipality in which they attend school, as long as they have established residency there. There is not a period of time required for a person to establish residency. The University of Maine System has different guidelines to establish student residency. A student may only be granted in-state tuition if he or she has proven that she has established residency for reasons other than academic, regardless of the length of time that he or she has lived in Maine.

So yes, there are absolutely cases in which students, deemed as "out of state" by the University of Maine, would be legally and correctly registered to vote in Maine.

Again, all this is on top of other moves across the country to disenfranchise young people and minorities. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, for example, recently shepherded a law through the state legislature that would require young people to secure a photo ID in order to vote. And now he just announced the closing of 10 DMV bureaus, making it harder for young people to get those photo IDs. And it's not just a coincidence that most of these closures are happening in traditionally Democratic areas, while other DMV offices are seeing their hours extended by the governor.

Hoover might be persuading some of the Republican establishment that appealing to young voters is the trendy thing to do. But the GOP isn't about to persuade young people, who are seeing Mitt Romney-like waffling from the Grand Old Party. Are you interested in us or not? You can't have it both ways.

In a number of state legislatures, photo-ID bills are making headway. These laws rarely, if ever, prevent voter fraud (mostly because it is pretty much non-existent), but they do prevent a lot of eligible people from voting (even good, christian people like nuns).

I haven't followed these bills closely, but fortunately youth orgs like the Student Association for Voter Empowerment (SAVE) have. This issue deserves more attention. Here's a statement they put out on the issue earlier today:

Young Voters Condemn Restrictive Photo ID Laws

Contact: Matthew Segal, SAVE Executive Director, 847-502-5012, matthew.segal [at] savevoting.org
Contact: Representative Joe Dorman, Oklahoma District 65, 580-476-3745, joe.dorman [at] okhouse.gov

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 12, 2009

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Student Association for Voter Empowerment (SAVE) opposes the recent progress of photo identification laws in numerous state legislatures. Recent actions in Oklahoma (SB 4) and Texas (SB 362) legislatures indicate a continued push for restrictive photo ID requirements that inhibit eligible voters from casting a ballot.

Although the implications of mandating a photo ID might seem benign given their ubiquitous use in airports, government agencies, and banks, there are tens of thousands of non-driving, non-traveling and non-banking Americans—both young and old—who do not possess such documentation. Both the Oklahoma and Texas bills mandate that a voter present a photo ID at the polls prior to casting a ballot. Acceptable identification must be issued by the state or federal government and include a photo, full name, and current address.

In the case of Texas, the law does not recognize all college or university photo IDs as acceptable forms of identification. Unless students are to change or update their driver’s licenses, many young voters will be forced to vote provisionally, lowering voter efficacy and making the political participation more bureaucratic, time-consuming, and cumbersome.

At least in the case of Oklahoma, college and university IDs will be considered valid. Representative Joe Dorman (D-65), who insisted on their inclusion, said, “I worry a poll worker might not allow the driver's license of an out-of-state student enrolled and registered to vote in their college community. I commend Rep. Sue Tibbs (R-23), who introduced the bill, for recognizing the importance of allowing these voters at both public and private institutions the opportunity to use this ID should the bill become law.”

Specific instances from the November election, most notably in Indiana, demonstrate the negative impact of photo identification requirements on electoral participation. College students were unable to satisfy ID requirements at the polls because their photo ID was from a different part of the state or another state entirely. Photo ID laws can prevent out-of-state college students from casting a ballot in the district where they attend school. In addition, most allowable substitutions for a photo ID are not easily obtainable because colleges and universities generally pay utility and other bills for their students.

“I am deeply disturbed by the prospect that legislators do not recognize that photo ID laws detract from the integrity of elections,” said Matthew Segal, the Executive Director of SAVE. “I know from hundreds of conversations, congressional testimony, and evidence on the ground that photo ID laws have deterred students from voting where they attend school, which is their home nine months of the year. In light of terrific youth participation in the November election, I am skeptical of our ability to maintain high turnout as states move forward with this disproportionately discriminatory law.”