Advertisement

Romano: Voter registration legislation focusing most on who gets a ballot

 
Published March 29, 2015

We are days away from the anniversary of Congress affirming George Washington as the first president of the United States on April 6, 1789.

History tells us Washington was chosen unanimously by 69 electors representing the 10 colonies that had ratified the Constitution.

What history often neglects to mention is there were supposed to be 81 votes. Two electors from Virginia and two from Maryland failed to cast their ballots, and the entire eight-man contingent from New York was too busy feuding to actually vote.

Turns out, 226 years later, we're still struggling with voting turnout.

You might have noticed state legislatures around the nation have spent a lot of time in recent years debating what should be the most basic of rights in a democracy:

Namely, the ability to vote.

We argue about absentee ballots. Early voting. Voter ID. Voter registration. We're poised to debate every detail and nuance of every election.

Yet much of that arguing seems to be a ruse. Legislators and political parties don't really care about the how, when and where of voting.

Only the who.

By making it easier — or more difficult — for certain demographics to cast their ballots, the power brokers are angling to gain a competitive advantage.

That seemed to be the clear intent of laws designed to eradicate voter fraud. Even though actual instances of in-person fraud are remarkably rare, 21 states recently passed laws making it more difficult to vote, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

Almost all of those states have Republican-controlled legislatures.

Democrats initially took to the streets and the courts to fight these laws that seemed to target poor and minority voters. Failing to shame the GOP into new directions, Democrats are now embarking on their own voting initiatives in blue states.

Last week, Oregon passed a law that automatically registers you to vote if you acquire or renew a driver's license. Already, there is talk that California may pass a similar law.

Yet, like the phantom voter fraud issue, there is some debate about the usefulness of automatic registration.

Back in the early days of the Clinton administration, the nation passed the Motor Voter Act that essentially made it mandatory for state DMV offices (as well as public assistance offices) to provide simple access to voter registration.

That means people applying for driver's licenses are already in a position to easily obtain their voter registration. What the Oregon law does is change the equation from an opt-in (you ask to register) to an opt-out (you decline your voter registration).

"As long as there are safeguards to protect the integrity of the registration process, this legislative change will be a great case study and allow us the opportunity to observe their procedures and results,'' said Pinellas County Supervisor of Elections Deborah Clark. "If it is effective, it could be put in place in other jurisdictions.''

And that's the lingering question about Oregon's new law:

Will it really increase voter turnout?

"If you go back to the Motor Voter law, there was all kinds of debate about how it would empower the blue collar, the low-income, the minority voters,'' said University of South Florida political science professor Susan MacManus. "And it just didn't really increase the numbers all that much.''

The Oregon law is also supposed to cut down on fraud because you need proof of citizenship to acquire a driver's license, whereas outside voter registration drives merely require a signature stating you are a U.S. citizen.

Even so, every Republican in the Oregon Legislature voted against the idea. Most studies and anecdotal evidence suggest they need not worry.

North Dakota is the only state that does not require registration (voters just show up at the polls with a valid ID) and it had a turnout of 61.1 percent for the 2012 presidential election, putting it squarely in the middle of the United States. In other words, registration does not seem to be as important as the relative engagement of voters.

So would an Oregon-style law work in Florida?

"I would be willing to look at anything we can to encourage voters,'' said Hillsborough County Supervisor of Elections Craig Latimer.

But would the Florida GOP go for that?

"There's elections and there's politics,'' Latimer said. "In my office, we do elections; we don't do politics.''