The January 14, 2008, New Yorker contains an article about Indiana in its “The Talk of the Town” section. The appearance of anything about Indiana in the New Yorker is a rarity, and a whole article, brief as it may be, was a sign that whatever it said about Indiana was not going to be good.
The article was about a case before the Supreme Court, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board. This case challenges Indiana’s new requirement that citizens present government-issued photo IDs when voting. Needless to say, the New Yorker does not approve.
I first voted in 1972, and have always found it odd that, until recently, I did not have to present an ID of some sort to prove I was who I said I was. I didn’t even need my voter registration card. I can’t cash a check without a photo ID, and now cannot board an airplane without one. I need a separate ID to get into the building where I work. When I apply for a job, I have to prove I am a U.S. citizen. But to vote? Just show up where you voted last time and sign on the dotted line.
I understand that there are registered voters who do not drive a car or fly in airplanes or have a checking account. But I am wondering whether requiring a photo ID will actually keep anyone who really wants to vote away from the polls.
There are some people who, although registered, would not vote unless you showed up at their door with a ballot in hand and a notary public by your side. Many of my peers refused to even register because they worried it would increase their chances of being called for jury duty. (I have been a registered voter for 35 years and have been called to jury duty once. Now my county calls up registered drivers, but I don’t know of anyone refusing to get a driver’s license because they might get called for jury duty.) But a bigger challenge to voting is many feel their vote simply does not count, so why bother?
If you are a liberal and/or Democrat in Indiana, you run the risk of never voting for a winner. In some county elections, it is not unusual for Republicans to run unopposed. This rule does not always hold true, but unless Evan Bayh is running for president, Indiana is going Republican in national elections.
I vote anyway, because 1) I want “them” (whoever “they” are) to know where I stand, and 2) if you don’t vote often enough, you are purged from the rolls and have to register again, which is a hassle, and 3) if you don’t vote, you can’t complain, and God forbid I should be restrained from complaining, and 4) if you don’t vote, eventually they won’t bother with elections anymore.
So how do we generate more interest in voting? I propose changing the primary season so that it is more like an NCAA tournament, where we start with the “Sweet 16″ of candidates for each party. Instead of running primaries state by state, the whole country votes in the primary of the party of their choice and the top eight winners move on to the next tier. After another vote, the top four are left, etc. Eventually, we have our parties’ candidates. Then all the winning candidates compete against each other for one final winner-takes-all election.
Or we could hand out free lottery tickets to voters. Or people could vote where they buy lottery tickets. Or they could get government-issued IDs where they buy lottery tickets. It seems almost everything about our current election procedures discourages participation in the democratic process. There is no reason we can’t modify that process to be easier.
