Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

GOP Already at Work to Keep Obama Voters From the Polls

By Steven Rosenfeld, AlterNet. Posted January 5, 2008.


GOP-backed election laws in many states pose barriers to Obama's supporters.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Steven Rosenfeld

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 

Barack Obama's winning coalition in Iowa drew on new voters, students, minorities and poor people, according to polls and other snapshots of Iowa's Jan. 3 caucuses.

The new voters, particularly college students, defied former President Bill Clinton, his candidate wife Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and Des Moines Register columnist David Yepsen, all who decried their efforts to vote because, while legal, they apparently were not Iowan enough. Needless to say, these Obama supporters did not take heed.

But if Obama -- or any Democrat -- is going to repeat his higher-than-expected turnout in other states, their supporters may have to surmount significant new voting rights barriers as the campaign moves through the primaries and into the fall election.

That is because the new voters, young people, minorities and the poor who turned out for Obama in Iowa are the very voters targeted by numerous Republican-led "ballot security" laws that have been adopted across the country since 2004. While some of these laws have been overturned, they include tough new voter ID requirements, restrictions on registering voters and even penalties for helping people with absentee ballots.

"Any mobile population are the ones that are most affected by election laws," said David Rosenfeld, national program director for Student Public Interest Research Groups, which tracks student voting. "The most mobile populations are young people and poor people."

Student voting is a good example. The real barrier to student voting in 2008 is not admonitions from the Clintons. It is a patchwork of state laws, according to Rosenfeld, that discourage student voting. Arizona, for instance, rejects out-of-state driver's licenses as an acceptable voter ID. The same is true in Indiana. New Hampshire requires students to register at local government offices. Virginia allows local election officials to decide if a dormitory qualifies as a "domicile." Some do, Rosenfeld said, and some do not. New Mexico restricts the number of voter registration forms one person may carry at a time. And Texas has new penalties for "improperly" helping people with absentee ballots.

Many of these laws -- particularly the voter ID laws and restrictions on registration drives -- have come into effect since the last presidential election. State legislatures, usually with Republican majorities, adopted the measures to combat "voter fraud," or what the GOP has said is people impersonating other voters for partisan benefit. What's notable about these laws is they affect an entire state electorate, while the problems provoking their adoption almost always concern a handful of individuals. That disparity has led many voting rights advocates to say these laws are meant to discourage Democratic voters.

Next week, the Supreme Court will hear a challenge to one of the most strident of these laws, Indiana's photo ID requirement for voters. The case is seen as being the most important election law case since the court's decision awarding the presidency to George W. Bush in 2000, because it either will codify a new generation of restrictive election laws or open up the voting process.

The stakes in the Indiana case are enormous for 2008. Voter registration groups like Project Vote, which seeks to register low-income people and will be working in 20 states this year, cite academic studies finding that if minorities voted as frequently as whites, 7.5 million more people would be voting for president next November.

Whether it is harder or easier for those people to vote, just as whether or not there is a candidate who motivates them, will be a major factor in selecting the next president. Indeed, as Obama's Iowa caucuses victory showed, a relatively open process and an inspirational candidate defied expectations with both turnout and the makeup of the electorate.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: voter id law, election theft, gop, poor voters, minority voters, youth vote, barack obama, election 2008

Steven Rosenfeld is a senior fellow at Alternet.org and co-author of What Happened in Ohio: A Documentary Record of Theft and Fraud in the 2004 Election, with Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman (The New Press, 2006).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Phase one of the facist coup was Florida 2000
Posted by: UnEasyOne on Jan 5, 2008 3:19 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Supremes had no problem with that.

Why would they have a problem with phase two?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Virginia
Posted by: surfreality on Jan 5, 2008 6:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Virginia allows local election officials to decide if a dormitory qualifies as a "domicile." Some do, Rosenfeld said, and some do not."

That seems to be unconstitutional. RE: "Equal protection under the law."

Under the VA scheme, conservative schools, like VMI could be allowed to vote; while disenfranchising a liberal school like VCU. Or vice versa...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Virginia Posted by: drmflorida
» RE: Virginia Posted by: surfreality
» RE: Virginia Posted by:
» RE: Virginia Posted by: billfaster
stealing obama's votes
Posted by: fishsandwich on Jan 5, 2008 6:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the dems back in 2004, led by barbara boxer, wanted to investigate voter fraud as a response to the irregularities in ohio. I remember barack obama standing there and prefacing his speach to the senate and the world that there was absolutely no voter fraud in ohio! wow.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: stealing obama's votes Posted by: drmflorida
Oh Boo Hoo Hoo
Posted by: gellero on Jan 5, 2008 7:03 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Funny, this piece has innuendo throughout but has not stated a single fact.
It's an 'impediment' to voting to prove who you are??? In a country with as many as 10 - 20 MILLION illegal residents.?? Most of us in the real world define that as self preservation.

And a college kid needs the minimum of a local drivers license to vote? That's an impediment? Do you really think college kids in a community for a couple of years have the RIGHT to influence local bond, road, and school initiatives? Unfortunately the do, under the law. And all they have to do to prove it is get a local drivers license.

Funny how an AlterNet article 3 weeks ago implied 18 year olds were to stupid to make a decision to enlist in the Army. But it's OK to vote on really serious stuff like bonds, zoning, etc., in a town they didn't grow up in or intend to permanently reside in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Oh Boo Hoo Hoo Posted by: drmflorida
» RE: Oh Boo Hoo Hoo Posted by: gellero
» RE: Oh Boo Hoo Hoo Posted by: Blink
» RE: Oh Boo Hoo Hoo Posted by: billfaster
» A moron? I think not. Posted by: Blink
» RE: Oh Boo Hoo Hoo Posted by: Longdream
» RE: Oh Boo Hoo Hoo Posted by: surfreality
» Afraid?? Posted by: gellero
» RE: Afraid?? Posted by: surfreality
» Getting a Legit ID?? Posted by: gellero
» RE: Getting a Legit ID?? Posted by: surfreality
» RE: Getting a Legit ID?? Posted by: gellero
» RE: Getting a Legit ID?? Posted by: surfreality
» RE: Getting a Legit ID?? Posted by: Cooltruth
» RE: Oh Boo Hoo Hoo Posted by: JSquercia
» RE: Oh Boo Hoo Hoo Posted by: Blink
» RE: Oh Boo Hoo Hoo Posted by: audiodef
Obama represents the future
Posted by: robchapman on Jan 5, 2008 8:39 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The remedy to this is simple.

Along with a campaign, the Dems need to run a massive voter registration drive.

Then they need to keep track of who the new voters are and make sure their votes are counted in November.

This is what parties are for.

Obama will be powerful in getting the people involved, but he needs helpers at the precinct level to keep the GOP from cheating again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where votes really count
Posted by: Mamarianne on Jan 5, 2008 9:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I once lived in a beautiful northern Arizona community where many "summer people" had cabins and lots. These people were affluent enough to own second homes. Most of them were from the Phoenix area. When our small school district raised property taxes to the level of adjoining school districts, an outraged movement called "Concerned Taxpayers" began a campaign to switch voter registrations of these city dwellers to our rural area. Often voter registration was done by mail, and vacant lots were claimed as primary residences. Our school board was ousted by a recall election. Our superintendent was smeared with what would now be called "swiftboating," and he took his skills to another district. Local elections are where votes really count. A single vote put the "Concerned Taxpayer" majority into power on our school board.
While impedements to voting must be carefully scrutinized and eliminated when appropriate, care must be taken to prevent small communities from being over-run by people who have no real concern for the quality of daily life in these small communites.
Not long after my small district was taken over by "Concerned Taxpayers," a nearby school district had its schoolboard replaced by a small group of evangelicals. It took several years of effort and long-overdue attention for that community to elect a more representative school board.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Where votes really count Posted by: audiodef
Wholesale Vs Retail
Posted by: HoldmAccountable on Jan 5, 2008 9:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You should all become more educated about ELECTION Fraud: NOT Voter Fraud. (there may have been ONLY 5 cases of individual voter fraud proven) Election Fraud is Wholesale - millions of votes are "flipped" by the black boxes where you cannot trace the changed votes. The repubicans had so many techniques to disenfranchise voters. There is PLENTY OF PROOF - read on bradblog.com and so many other sites. Unless you understand how this has been done in the past 2 elections, be prepared for yet another stolen election. ONLY in America will people sit back and believe the corporate news that says the exit polls lied. Exit polls are the gold standard in every other election in every other country. PLEASE learn about what is going to happen!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Wholesale Vs Retail Posted by: lizritchey
» RE: Wholesale Vs Retail Posted by: JSquercia
Honest Elections
Posted by: macdon1 on Jan 5, 2008 2:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Will we have them in 2008? I doubt it. Election fraud has been proven again and again and nothing has been done. I will still vote and hope but I am afraid we will find another Bush clone elected despite the will of the people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Honest Elections Posted by: OneliaG
Barack Obama's honesty and right judgement
Posted by: jkojs on Jan 5, 2008 3:15 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
NO more-
Hillary Clinton dynasty,
John McCain's Politics of Fear,
John Edward's Politics of Convenience,
Corrupted Health Industry.

ITS SICKENING.

!!! ITS TIME FOR CHANGE !!!

Hillary Clinton and John Edwards Voted for War on Iraq.
Barack Obama opposed this and he was right.

Hillary Clinton supported Bush on aid to Pakistan for wrong reasons.
Barack Obama opposed this and he was right.

John Edwards is using populist theme for convenience in this election and is a big hypocrite.
Remember that John Edwards was a Trial Lawyer, worked for a Hedge Fund Company and has 28000 sq ft mansion and $400 hair cuts.

Barack Obama is a community organizer from the beginning and is honest person and refused to be a Trial Lawyer.

BARACK OBAMA's JUDGEMENT TRIUMPHS OVER HILLARY CLINTON'S WRONG EXPERIENCE.

BARACK OBAMA'S HONESTY TRIUMPHS OVER JOHN EDWARDS'S HYPOCRISY.

BARACK OBAMA'S POLITICS OF HOPE TRIUMPHS OVER JOHN MCCAIN'S POLITICS OF FEAR.

!!! VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA !!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What is up with the Obama homage?
Posted by: powerofbelief on Jan 5, 2008 4:57 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree, republicans will try to steal votes from any democratic candidates. I also agree, the 2001 and 2004 elections were stolen. With that said, where is the Alternet's journalism covering the real Obama? Im talking about the Obama that has no progressive policies and leans closer to a moderate conservative then a moderate liberal.

Alternet is deceiving the progressive community by having front page articles painting Obama as a progressive and Hillary a total opposite. In reality, Obama spent more money in Iowa than Hillary did. Both Hillary and Obama have nearly identical voting records. If you go to opensecrets.org, you will see Obama has long been bought out by corporate interests. Most of Obama's staff is former Clintonites. So, I ask, what is going on?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Throwing the Elections by Keeping Dems and Blacks Away
Posted by: sofla100 on Jan 5, 2008 8:08 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is what we are expected to believe. That without having photo ID's and multiple pieces of identification at the polls, hordes of illegal immigrants will be voting illegally. Come on, we are expected to believe this stupidity? That an illegal immigrant is going to risk jail and deportation just to vote. It doesn't happen, nobody is that stupid. But, plenty of poor Americans don't have drivers licenser or photo ID's. Therefore, what better way to drive down the Dem. vote then require this? See, it is all about manipulation. Here in FL, in 2000, we also had the Repub.'s removing thousands of people from the voter roles improperly. Somehow or another, they were all about 95% black and Democrats. Now you know how GW became President.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And Then They Complain About Chavez and Putin!
Posted by: sofla100 on Jan 5, 2008 8:11 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America needs international observers from other countries to monitor her elections and what happens on election day. It's worse what happens here then in Russia or Venezuela.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Voting Reform
Posted by: douglashoyt on Jan 6, 2008 6:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The whole voting system must be redone.

Federal voting should be separated from state voting; maybe different days or different places.

The feds must standardize the national election system. We must have public financing of federal elections-no private money, no 527 adds. Maybe only one month of electionering. If a candidate cannot explain their ideas in one month to the voter, it is unlikely they have the intelligence to be good leaders.

Nothing will change, however. The system works good for the ruling elite.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Remember how much they value the constitution
Posted by: Guitardedkev on Jan 6, 2008 10:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJGIq1ibNm0

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Absolutely Right! Edwards is UNQUALIFIED!
Posted by: Newsguy on Jan 6, 2008 4:20 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Commentators who rail against John Edwards for his expensive haircut and mansion are absolutely right. What right has this successful trial lawyer to be concerned about poor people and middle class folks? After all, he made his fortune representing poor and middle class people in court against huge corporations. What a hypocrite!

Edwards would only be qualified to be concerned about poor people if he lived in a shack and got his haircut at home in the kitchen. Or if he had been a failed trial lawyer. Then he would be perfect. Unless he becomes poor or earns only about $40,000 a year he should forget about the problems of poor and middle class people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Kinda like Kerry skiing in Switzerland eh? Posted by: common intelligence
Where is the FEC?
Posted by: katiedid on Jan 6, 2008 4:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... oh, that's right, George W. has done away with the Federal Elections Commission -- the oversear of U.S. elections. Good timing, George!

It's impeachment time!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Will There Be An Election?
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman on Jan 6, 2008 5:34 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As Noam Chomsky has pointed out, the more fundamental issue is whether there will be a real election to begin with. If the presidential candidates are all bought and paid for by corporate America (all Republicans, Clinton, Obama, and to some extent Edwards), there is no actual election, just a personality choice. Yes, the 2000 and 2004 elections were stolen, but how much does that actually matter when the Democrats who won would have done many of the same things?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama 2004 electoral college statement, part 2
Posted by: on Jan 7, 2008 1:02 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I strongly urge that this Chamber, as well as the House of Representatives, take it upon itself once and for all to reform this system.

There is no reason, at a time when we have enormous battles taking place ideologically all across the globe, at a time when we try to make
certain we encourage democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan and other places throughout the world, that we have the legitimacy of our elections challenged--rightly or wrongly--by people who are not certain as to whether our processes are fair and just.

This is something we can fix. We have experts on both sides of the aisle who know how to fix it. What we have lacked is the political will.

I strongly urge that, in a circumstance in which too many voters have stood in long lines for hours, in which too many voters have cast votes on machines that jam or malfunction or suck the votes without a trace, in which too many voters try to register to vote only to discover that their names don't appear on the roles or that partisan political interests and those that serve them have worked hard to throw up every barrier to recognize them as lawful, in which too many voters will know that there are different elections for different parts of the country and that these differences turn shamefully on differences of wealth or
of race, in which too many voters have to contend with State officials, servants of the public, who put partisan or personal political
interests ahead of the public in administering our elections--in such circumstances, we have an obligation to fix the problem.

I have to add this is not a problem unique to this election, and it is not a partisan problem. Keep in mind, I come from Cook County, from
Chicago, in which there is a long record of these kinds of problems taking place and disadvantaging Republicans as well as Democrats. So I ask that all of us rise up and use this occasion to amend this problem.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.