Wisconsin has one of the highest voting rates in the nation largely because it has allowed, since 1976, same-day voter registration at the polls. It's a practice that's especially bumped up voter participation in urban areas and among the poor.
So, of course, Gov. Scott Walker and the Wisconsin legislature are looking at doing away with the practice. Because, y'know, those elderly polling place volunteers can't handle the pressure. And, y'know, there might be fraud. Or space aliens. Or ACORN. Or people voting for Democrats. Or something equally scary.
Embedded Link
Walker calls for changes to same-day voter registration rules
Madison – Gov. Scott Walker has joined one of the Legislature’s most powerful Republicans in saying he’s considering ending the state’s same-day voter registration law, drawing quick criticism from le…
Google+: View post on Google+
How many elderly do you think are really first time voters? Or licensed drivers due to motor voter laws. Wisconsin voted overwhelmingly for Walker, twice, in his first term.
Unfortunately, the Republicans regained control of the state senate (which they lost in the recall elections), and there is no stopping them.
Well, not quite true. The courts have struck down a lot of Walkers' attempts to change elections laws already.
He's saying the polling place volunteers are elderly.
+Shar Banning I get that, but who are all of these people every election who have never registered?
People who have moved to, or within, the state? People following jobs, most likely living in apartments or lower-cost housing? Students?
People who have moved, people who are just becoming old enough to vote, people who have had no interest in politics but suddenly felt they should, immigrants who have recently become citizens…have I left anyone out?
Students, people with foreclosed homes … it's in the article.
warning: comments at JSOnline are a real cesspool.
I would guess most of the people you mentioned would have thought about it prior to election day. I don't care enough to argue it, but it is interesting that so many "last minute" voters have become the focus in a country that forgot to get the absantee ballots out to its military in a timely fashion.
I would think their votes should count, too.
In Canada we can register at the polls as well. In comes in really handy when you haven't received a registration card in the mail.
Also I would have come in handy for my friend in Florida, who did register…but her registration mysteriously never got processed.
I had that happen once when moving to another state. I missed a deadline
but was able to vote based on my ability to prove my residence.
I wisj elections were more of a thing people wanted to take their time and
register for. The idea people can be paid to go out and register folks is
kind of crazy. It is just another big business now.
+Jonathan Lancaster What you think these people ought to have thought about registration isn't relevant. For people without a car (or working two jobs, or with children , or caring for elderly parents. or … etc.) requiring two trips to register and vote is a burden. There is nothing "scare quote" worthy in the fact that some people are justifiably busy with their own lives. I think it's great they can still find a way to vote.
Active duty military should be able to vote. Let's fix that problem too, instead making it harder for others.
I agree it would be highly desirable if people were motivated, aware, and had free enough schedules to get voter registration done beforehand, +Jonathan Lancaster. There are any number of things that might be desirable to similarly require of voters — knowledge and understanding of US history, the Constitution, maybe some economics and current events.
But essentially the only restriction we have is on age (minimum) and legal residence (and, in some states, lack of disqualifying past felony convictions). Within those bounds, we ought to be encouraging as much voter participation as possible, because the foundation of our political society is participation and the buy-in that produces.
An interesting twist on this story is that the GOP pols are mentioning motor-voter alternatives, where registration materials are made available at the DMV (for those who have cars) and welfare offices. Not only is this a more costly alternative, but it's an option that the GOP has traditionally opposed, ostensibly because of that cost but also because, yes, it makes it easier for folks to get registered, esp. the low-lifes that hang around welfare offices.
+Dan Eastwood You come across rather angry. My ideas are as relevant as your own. Some people are busy, but I sincerely doubt those are the ones who need last minute voter registration.
I do not propose that it is wrong to offer instant, no question asked registration, but I am saying many other states seem to have no problem with registration deadlines. Like it or not, the government should be checking to make sure people are voting once, legally, in the right place.
We may not agree but your condescending does nothing to elevate your argument.
I think it is an interesting topic, but I think the premise of "If you can't beat them…" should be examined a bit more.
It is a fact that Walker was not beaten. Tons of money was spent to call him to the carpet and the people voted for him, again. Yet, some would call it sour grapes that his opposition simply then goes to court. With the court involved the say of the people is irrelevant. That I recall is what was said about Bush. I think it is just too early to think the worst of Walker just because he is a Republican. But I'm an optimist. Who knows.
It does not appear that WI has "instant, no question asked registration", but requires some measure of identifacation and address. Per http://gab.wi.gov/elections-voting/voters/registration-voting …
—–
The federal "Help American Vote Act of 2002" requires any person registering to vote to supply his or her Wisconsin Department of Transportation-issued driver's license number.
Electors who have not been issued a Wisconsin driver license must provide the last four digits of their Social Security Number OR their Wisconsin state ID card number.
If the elector does not have a current, valid Wisconsin driver license, Wisconsin state ID card, or Social Security Number, the applicant may indicate this by filling in the appropriate circle on the registration form. (Box 2 on GAB-131)
THE REGISTRATION CANNOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL THE ELECTOR PROVIDES THIS INFORMATION.
If the voter has a current, valid Wisconsin driver license but does not know the number and did not bring it to the polling place, poll workers must allow the voter to vote by provisional ballot. (Note: the voter CANNOT use the last 4 digits of their Social Security Number if he or she has been issued a Wisconsin driver’s license). The provisional ballot will not be counted until the voter either:
a) brings his or her driver license number to his or her polling place before the polls close at 8:00 pm on Election Day; or
b) transmits (via fax, email, telephone call or personal visit) his or her driver license number to the municipal clerk before 4:00 pm on the Friday after the Election.
…
If you wish to register to vote at your polling place, you must bring proof that you reside at your present location. For purposes of voter registration, acceptable forms of proof of residence must include:
A current and complete name, including both the given and family name; and
A current and complete residential address, including a numbered street address, if any, and the name of a municipality.
NOTE: Proof of residency is required for voter registration and must be current and valid.
Dave has it right. ID (or proof of residence) is required to register, but not to vote.
A recent law enacted to require ID to vote was struck down in court as unconstitutional. A brief summary here: http://elections.wispolitics.com/2012/03/judge-grants-injunction-halting.html
And Jonathan, not anger, but criticism, and perhaps I might have expressed it better. I was in a bit of a rush this morning and didn't have time for a re-read and edit.
It is irrelevant for me (or you) to judge what other people ought to have thought about. I have yet to see any evidence that the alleged harm of voter fraud is not far outweighed by the benefit of more people being allowed to exercise their voting rights. Certainly we have evidence that more people are voting. Where is the evidence of significant voter fraud?
All our states have some quirks 🙂
Why is there not a national standard?
Voting law is, in general, handled by state law in the US. There are some federal voting laws to set some high-level standards, but those are primarily limited to enforcing federal constitutional rights on the voting process.
But why? (Sorry I feel like I'm 6 asking again!) wouldn't it make it so much easier for everyone if it was the same everywhere?
This country was founded to have strong state governments and a weaker federal government. Each state has the ability to make its own laws. May not always make the most sense or play to one's interests, but that is the way it started. Obviously, that is changing more and more to a larger federal government.
As +Jonathan Lancaster notes. The US Constitution (as initially amended in the 10th Amendment) limits the Federal Government to only those powers explicitly vested to it in the Constitution. The 14th Amendment extended federal constitutional restrictions to the state governments, but, by and large, federal laws can only derive from explicit federal-granted powers.
Thus, the federal Voting Rights Act, which imposed some federal control over voting processes in US states (esp. those that had been disenfranchising blacks through poll taxes and the like) was only made legally possible by the 15th Amendment of the Constitution (which guaranteed the right to vote regardless of race).
In order to impose federal standards for voting procedures on the states, an appropriate US Constitutional provision would have to be identified. That's been the basis for federal judges overriding particular provisions of state laws, but it's a large next step to federal voting laws that get down to the niggling questions of what sort of voter ID can be required or what hours polls should be open on what days.
Our amendments have to be confusing to people outside the country.
Well, to be fair, they confuse a lot of people inside our country, too.
Thanks guys, I kind of get it now…even though I think it's dumb.
The tension between state control and federal control has been a constant in US politics, and something that is difficult to explain. It does lead to consistencies and possible injustices; the flip side is that it allows the states to experiment in different ways of doing things, governed locally, that the centralized government could not. The tension comes in things that one is convinced a given state is doing wrong that one wishes the feds would step in about (voter suppression, abortion restrictions) vs. the things that one is convinced the federal government is doing wrong that the states can try and remedy for themselves (marijuana criminalization, gay marriage). It provides the best and worst of both worlds.