Sunday, November 02, 2014
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2014/11/02/yes-hoosiers-really-election/18268303/
http://www.ibj.com/articles/50281-morris-another-plea-to-vote
In 2004, participation in the election by registered voters was about 50%. In 2005, Indiana enacted voter ID. In this week's election, turnout is expected to be about 25%. Should we blame voter ID?
Well, of course not. One trend we saw starting with the 2006 election was that in the over 65 crowd, who can do no-excuse absentee balloting, absentee ballots about doubled. I haven't seen the stats for that since 2006. It would be a useful number to track.
Similarly, voter ID is not the main reason people in Indiana vote less than in Illinois.
The law turnout this week is not (solely) because people have stopped voting due to voter ID.
My point is, some of the voter ID apologists have been claiming that voter turnout, especially among minorities, has been up since Indiana passed voter ID. That had little to nothing to do with voter ID,and everything to do with, first, a tight late primary contest between Clinton and Obama, and then 2 cycles of the first half-black president. Voter ID wasn't the reason for the upturn, and isn't the reason for the downturn this week. http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2014/11/02/yes-hoosiers-really-election/18268303/Voter ID probably discourages 1 to 2 percent of Indiana (former) voters, partially offset by higher turn-out by those upset about disenfranchisement. Usually, 1-2% doesnt swing an election. Sometimes, however, it does. I am the 1%.
http://dailysignal.com/2014/11/02/voter-fraud-real-threat-integrity-elections/
this article/editorial has the wrong conclusions, but addresses important questions.
. As John Fund and I outline in our new book.. oh, never mind. Oh, it's Hans, never mind.
or there's this one by Ed Meese. http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/11/02/edwin-meese-kenneth-blackwell-election/18126049/
http://www.ibj.com/articles/50281-morris-another-plea-to-vote
In 2004, participation in the election by registered voters was about 50%. In 2005, Indiana enacted voter ID. In this week's election, turnout is expected to be about 25%. Should we blame voter ID?
Well, of course not. One trend we saw starting with the 2006 election was that in the over 65 crowd, who can do no-excuse absentee balloting, absentee ballots about doubled. I haven't seen the stats for that since 2006. It would be a useful number to track.
Similarly, voter ID is not the main reason people in Indiana vote less than in Illinois.
In 2010, Illinois turnout was 51 percent of registered voters, compared to 41 percent in Indiana. In 2006, Illinois recorded 49 percent turnout versus 40 percent in Indiana. Illinois had 52 percent turnout in 2002, while Indiana was at 39 percent.
Even in 1982, a recent peak year for Indiana midterm turnout at 62.5 percent, voter turnout in Illinois was 65 percent.
In presidential and Indiana gubernatorial election years, such as 2012, voter turnout rates in Illinois (59 percent) and Indiana (56 percent) are more similar.
http://www.nwitimes.com/news/state-and-regional/illinois/crossing-the-line----voter-turnout/article_8035f5e1-99a8-5470-8633-e1232f27571e.html (annoying chipotle ad)The law turnout this week is not (solely) because people have stopped voting due to voter ID.
My point is, some of the voter ID apologists have been claiming that voter turnout, especially among minorities, has been up since Indiana passed voter ID. That had little to nothing to do with voter ID,and everything to do with, first, a tight late primary contest between Clinton and Obama, and then 2 cycles of the first half-black president. Voter ID wasn't the reason for the upturn, and isn't the reason for the downturn this week. http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2014/11/02/yes-hoosiers-really-election/18268303/Voter ID probably discourages 1 to 2 percent of Indiana (former) voters, partially offset by higher turn-out by those upset about disenfranchisement. Usually, 1-2% doesnt swing an election. Sometimes, however, it does. I am the 1%.
http://dailysignal.com/2014/11/02/voter-fraud-real-threat-integrity-elections/
this article/editorial has the wrong conclusions, but addresses important questions.
. As John Fund and I outline in our new book.. oh, never mind. Oh, it's Hans, never mind.
or there's this one by Ed Meese. http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/11/02/edwin-meese-kenneth-blackwell-election/18126049/
Comments:
Post a Comment
