Voting is not a constitutional right

[ttt]

But it should be....


www.vox.com/2014/10/20/6997315/voting-rights-amendment-affirmative-right-to-vote


On Saturday, the US Supreme Court decided — in a ruling that lacked any accompanying explanation — that a controversial voter ID law in Texas will be in effect this November, notwithstanding a contrary decision from a trial court.

The legal arguments around these kinds of voter ID laws, which tend to disproportionately disqualify non-white voters, hinge on whether they constitute a form of illegal (or unconstitutional) racial discrimination. But the fact that the legal, political, and constitutional arguments need to get pushed into a narrow racial discrimination frame is itself a symptom of the real problem: it's about time American citizens obtained a constitutional right to vote.


The United States has had the good fortune in our history to have avoided conquest by foreign powers or military coups, which has left us with a constitutional architecture that substantially predates modern democratic norms.

When the Constitution was enacted, it did not include a right to vote for the simple reason that the Founders didn't think most people should vote. Voting laws, at the time, mostly favored white, male property-holders, and the rules varied sharply from state to state. But in the first half of the nineteenth century, the idea of popular democracy took root across the land. Property qualifications were universally abolished and the franchise became the key marker of white male political equality. Subsequent activists sought to further expand the franchise by barring discrimination on the basis of race (the 15th Amendment) and gender (the 19th Amendment) — establishing the norm that all citizens should have the right to vote.

But this norm is just a norm. There is no actual constitutional provision stating that all citizens have the right to vote, only that voting rights cannot be dispensed on the basis of race or gender discrimination. A law requiring you to cut your hair short before voting, or to dye it blue, or to say "pretty please let me vote," all might pass muster. And so might a voter ID requirement.

The legality of these kinds of laws hinge on whether they violate the Constitution's protections against race and gender discrimination, not on whether they prevent citizens from voting. As Harvard Law professor Lani Guinier has written, this "leaves one of the fundamental elements of democratic citizenship tethered to the whims of local officials."

A right whose time has come

The solution, both to America's voting access problem and to alleviating public concerns about fraud, is to establish an affirmative right to vote.

America prohibits racial and gender discrimination in voting rights because of a clear belief in the importance of voting to equal citizenship. The best way to vindicate this right would be through something like the language of a proposed constitutional amendment introduced last year by Reps. Mark Pocan and Keith Ellison, which states that "every citizen of the United States, who is of legal voting age, shall have the fundamental right to vote in any public election held in the jurisdiction in which the citizen resides."

A constitutional right to vote would instantly flip the script on anti-fraud efforts. States would retain a strong interest in developing rules and procedures that make it hard for ineligible voters to vote, but those efforts would be bounded by an ironclad constitutional guarantee that legitimate citizens' votes must be counted. A state that wanted to require possession of a certain ID card to vote, for example, would have to take affirmative steps to ensure that everyone has that ID card, or that there's a process for an ID-less citizen to cast a ballot and have it counted later upon verification of citizenship.

In that context of a solid affirmative guarantee, efforts to prevent fraudulent voting could proceed without raising the specter of vote suppression. Of course, passing new constitutional amendments is hard. But an affirmative right to vote would give voting-rights proponents a positive vision to organize around, rather than simply playing defense against various ID measures. And while it's easy for politicians to talk about their desire to secure the ballot, a Voting Rights Amendment would be difficult to oppose.

But beyond the politics, it's a good idea on the merits. It would enshrine in our Constitution a principle that we already believe: that the right to vote is an inherent attribute of citizenship and a cornerstone of civic equality.

[ttt]

Also, I would LOVE to see some of the GOP arguments against this. Yes, please come out and tell us why not every citizen should have the right to vote. Let's hear it.

[Velar Fricative]

Oct 21, 2014 7:46:39 GMT -5 ttt said:

Also, I would LOVE to see some of the GOP arguments against this. Yes, please come out and tell us why not every citizen should have the right to vote. Let's hear it.

I'll be waiting for this too. Awwwwwwkward silence will ensue.

[teengirlsquad]

I'm confused by all of this - I definitely think all citizens (of a certain age) should have the right to vote. But how do we make sure only citizens are voting. I definitely do not think people who are not citizens of this country should vote in our elections. This shouldn't be that hard right?

[ttt]

Oct 21, 2014 8:21:21 GMT -5 teengirlsquad said:

I'm confused by all of this - I definitely think all citizens (of a certain age) should have the right to vote. But how do we make sure only citizens are voting. I definitely do not think people who are not citizens of this country should vote in our elections. This shouldn't be that hard right?

Is there any evidence that people who are not citizens are even attempting to vote in our elections? 

I just don't think this is a real problem. 

[teengirlsquad]

I don't know - if people keep trying to pass laws about it, I would assume there must be a problem. But maybe their isn't...

[ttt]

Oct 21, 2014 8:27:36 GMT -5 teengirlsquad said:

I don't know - if people keep trying to pass laws about it, I would assume there must be a problem. But maybe their isn't...

No, there really isn't. The GOP is trying to pass laws about it because they know that requiring photo IDs will mean a lot of legitimate citizens who are poor, elderly or disabled will be unable to obtain those IDs and then unable to vote. And those people mostly vote Democrat, so keeping those people from being able to vote will help them win elections. 

This is why they keep trying to pass laws. There is no evidence whatsoever that non-citizens are trying to illegally vote on any sort of significant level. 

ETA: Out of one billion ballots cast since the year 2000, there were 31 cases of voter fraud. 

www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/08/06/a-comprehensive-investigation-of-voter-impersonation-finds-31-credible-incidents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/

[heyjude]

Oct 21, 2014 8:27:36 GMT -5 teengirlsquad said:

I don't know - if people keep trying to pass laws about it, I would assume there must be a problem. But maybe their isn't...

This is so...I don't know...sweet and innocent, and I'm sad I'm about to defile your thinking. These laws are not passed to address the problem of "non citizens voting." They are passed to prevent certain demographics that are heavily aligned with the Democrats from voting.

Welcome to American politics.

[secretlyevil]

Really isn't this just another way for people to be discreet about their prejudices? It's a way to legally profile looking for "brown" people aka illegal.

ETA: Or what heyjude said

[josieposy]

Well there was this one time in Washington State during a governor's race that an entire cemetery voted for Governor Tracy.

Oh wait that was Black Sheep.....

[heyjude]

And I said this in the other thread but it bears repeating, if you really think voter fraud is a big issue you don't solve it by making it harder for citizens to vote you solve it by beefing up enforcement.

[teengirlsquad]

Oct 21, 2014 8:31:02 GMT -5 heyjude said:

Oct 21, 2014 8:27:36 GMT -5 teengirlsquad said:

I don't know - if people keep trying to pass laws about it, I would assume there must be a problem. But maybe their isn't...

This is so...I don't know...sweet and innocent, and I'm sad I'm about to defile your thinking. These laws are not passed to address the problem of "non citizens voting." They are passed to prevent certain demographics that are heavily aligned with the Democrats from voting.

Welcome to American politics.

Well in that case - I am against the IDs. I swear I'm not stupid, and I really do try to keep up on the issues. But I do live in the predominately GOP suburban south, so I'm probably hearing things about this issue that are not true.

[secretlyevil]

Oct 21, 2014 8:53:57 GMT -5 teengirlsquad said:

Oct 21, 2014 8:31:02 GMT -5 heyjude said:

This is so...I don't know...sweet and innocent, and I'm sad I'm about to defile your thinking. These laws are not passed to address the problem of "non citizens voting." They are passed to prevent certain demographics that are heavily aligned with the Democrats from voting.

Welcome to American politics.

Well in that case - I am against the IDs. I swear I'm not stupid, and I really do try to keep up on the issues. But I do live in the predominately GOP suburban south, so I'm probably hearing things about this issue that are not true.

No one is calling you stupid. Location, irl friends and family greatly impact our belief system and view on things. Hell, this board isn't exactly neutral or evenly represented. In the past we've tried to argue the other side. I'm not sure how well that turned out my memory fails me. Anyway I digress. The point is, it is very hard to find something out there that actually does present an issue without a right or left leaning biased. It's really up to each person to do a lot of research to determine what's what on an issue and form their own opinion. Most people have leanings already based on the aforementioned influences.

ETA: Sorry I didn't mean to turn that into a soapbox moment. Really I just wanted to assure you that no one thinks you're stupid.

[ttt]

Oct 21, 2014 8:53:57 GMT -5 teengirlsquad said:

Oct 21, 2014 8:31:02 GMT -5 heyjude said:

This is so...I don't know...sweet and innocent, and I'm sad I'm about to defile your thinking. These laws are not passed to address the problem of "non citizens voting." They are passed to prevent certain demographics that are heavily aligned with the Democrats from voting.

Welcome to American politics.

Well in that case - I am against the IDs. I swear I'm not stupid, and I really do try to keep up on the issues. But I do live in the predominately GOP suburban south, so I'm probably hearing things about this issue that are not true.

There is a LOT of misinformation about it out there, so I can't blame you for that. 

[pixy0stix]

Oct 21, 2014 9:03:31 GMT -5 secretlyevil said:

In the past we've tried to argue the other side. I'm not sure how well that turned out my memory fails me. 

OH! Was this in the great debates that I tried to organize?

It fell apart because some people who flitted in to read couldn't distinguish between debate style and personal beliefs.

[secretlyevil]

Oct 21, 2014 9:06:04 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

Oct 21, 2014 9:03:31 GMT -5 secretlyevil said:

In the past we've tried to argue the other side. I'm not sure how well that turned out my memory fails me. 

OH! Was this in the great debates that I tried to organize?

It fell apart because some people who flitted in to read couldn't distinguish between debate style and personal beliefs.

Is that what happened? I couldn't remember. Debating is a talent few have honed well. I am definitely not one of them.

[teengirlsquad]

Oct 21, 2014 9:03:31 GMT -5 secretlyevil said:

Oct 21, 2014 8:53:57 GMT -5 teengirlsquad said:

Well in that case - I am against the IDs. I swear I'm not stupid, and I really do try to keep up on the issues. But I do live in the predominately GOP suburban south, so I'm probably hearing things about this issue that are not true.

No one is calling you stupid. Location, irl friends and family greatly impact our belief system and view on things. Hell, this board isn't exactly neutral or evenly represented. In the past we've tried to argue the other side. I'm not sure how well that turned out my memory fails me. Anyway I digress. The point is, it is very hard to find something out there that actually does present an issue without a right or left leaning biased. It's really up to each person to do a lot of research to determine what's what on an issue and form their own opinion. Most people have leanings already based on the aforementioned influences.

ETA: Sorry I didn't mean to turn that into a soapbox moment. Really I just wanted to assure you that no one thinks you're stupid.

Thanks! I really have learned a ton since I started reading this board. I rarely participate because I feel like I'm not well informed enough. I also tend to be a bit more conservative than the board. But I have definitely had my eyes opened to the other side of many issues since reading here and would identify more as a moderate than I used to.

I also really didn't think y'all were calling me stupid - it felt a little boastful to be all "hey I'm on team sweet and innocent over here"

[secretlyevil]

We need more moderates/conservative leaning on the board. It's nice to have a little diversity.

[teengirlsquad]

Oct 21, 2014 9:24:34 GMT -5 secretlyevil said:

We need more moderates/conservative leaning on the board. It's nice to have a little diversity.

Thanks - I will try to speak up more often

[tacosforlife]

I think @teengirlsqaud's response highlights the real danger of these voter ID laws.

On the surface, they do sound reasonable. Of course we don't want people voting who shouldn't be. And since most people have had a state issued ID since they were 16 or 17 years old, requiring ID seems like no big deal.

It's only when you start digging and realizing there are old black ladies who were born in Mississippi under Jim Crow and can't get a birth certificate that you start to realize these laws actually disenfranchise people. You start realizing there are people who, as unfathomable as it may be, have never had ID but still should have the right to vote.

I always come back to voting being a fundamental right and any restrictions needing to pass strict scrutiny. That's a legal concept that I don't expect the average person to understand, but I do expect the GOP leaders who push these laws to understand. And it's why I'm appalled at SCOTUS.

[heyjude]

Oct 21, 2014 8:53:57 GMT -5 teengirlsquad said:

Oct 21, 2014 8:31:02 GMT -5 heyjude said:

This is so...I don't know...sweet and innocent, and I'm sad I'm about to defile your thinking. These laws are not passed to address the problem of "non citizens voting." They are passed to prevent certain demographics that are heavily aligned with the Democrats from voting.

Welcome to American politics.

Well in that case - I am against the IDs. I swear I'm not stupid, and I really do try to keep up on the issues. But I do live in the predominately GOP suburban south, so I'm probably hearing things about this issue that are not true.

I'm sorry if I made you feel stupid. Politics should be as you depicted: There's a problem. Politicians pass laws to solve it. I wish it was that way all the time.

[teengirlsquad]

Oct 21, 2014 9:42:54 GMT -5 tacosforlife said:

I think @teengirlsqaud's response highlights the real danger of these voter ID laws.

On the surface, they do sound reasonable. Of course we don't want people voting who shouldn't be. And since most people have had a state issued ID since they were 16 or 17 years old, requiring ID seems like no big deal.

It's only when you start digging and realizing there are old black ladies who were born in Mississippi under Jim Crow and can't get a birth certificate that you start to realize these laws actually disenfranchise people. You start realizing there are people who, as unfathomable as it may be, have never had ID but still should have the right to vote.

I always come back to voting being a fundamental right and any restrictions needing to pass strict scrutiny. That's a legal concept that I don't expect the average person to understand, but I do expect the GOP leaders who push these laws to understand. And it's why I'm appalled at SCOTUS.

This makes a lot of sense. Thanks!

[pinkdutchtulips]

I was the crazy kid in hs who when faced w/ an amendment to pick to do a paper on, I picked the 19th Amendment (the one that gave women the right to vote). It was interesting to see the evolution of voting from the Framer's intent of only allowing white, male, property owners over the age of 18 or was it 21? to vote and then having the Electoral College as the voting body for all the poor white males over 18 who DIDN'T own property until we gave former male slaves the right to vote then after a TON of hand wringing allowing women the right to vote followed by during our parents' generation, the voting age being dropped from 21 to 18 in response to the Vietnam War. Convicted felons, I believe from the onset, have NOT been able to vote.

As in my old age, I start taking 1-2 steps to the right from my former perch 2 steps to the left, and these voter ID laws while I can understand their intent, I do not agree w/ the logistics of it. the potential for disenfranchisement is HUGE - I'm thinking of married women whose drivers licenses don't match their voter registration or worse back woods male polling station workers who refuse to believe that there are women out there who for whatever reason DID NOT take their husband's last name. in addition to the black women of the former jim crow south who can't get copies of their birth certificates or the problems that naturalized citizens might face (I can just imagine my aunt from Thailand now a US naturalized citizen being denied the chance to vote bc she's the wrong color minus the mountains of documents that prove otherwise).

GOP voter ID laws are the 21st century version of state troopers standing at the doors of polling stations in the Deep South sending the very subtle message to the wrong (ie black) colored voters NOT to vote *sigh*

[simplyinpenguin]

The 15th amendment and the 19th amendment gives minorities and women the right to vote...but I don't see anywhere where it says that white males have the constitutional right to vote, even prior to the 15th amendment. So I guess white male are the ones without the constitutional right. If they're going to go literal, let's REALLY go literal and watch these politicians' heads explode when white males are driven away from the pols.

[secretlyevil]

Oct 21, 2014 13:18:29 GMT -5 simplyinpenguin said:

The 15th amendment and the 19th amendment gives minorities and women the right to vote...but I don't see anywhere where it says that white males have the constitutional right to vote, even prior to the 15th amendment. So I guess white male are the ones without the constitutional right. If they're going to go literal, let's REALLY go literal and watch these politicians' heads explode when white males are driven away from the pols.

I choked on my water.

[UMaineTeach]

Oct 21, 2014 7:44:28 GMT -5 ttt said:

www.vox.com/2014/10/20/6997315/voting-rights-amendment-affirmative-right-to-vote
 the language of a proposed constitutional amendment introduced last year by Reps. Mark Pocan and Keith Ellison, which states that "every citizen of the United States, who is of legal voting age, shall have the fundamental right to vote in any public election held in the jurisdiction in which the citizen resides."

So did congress vote on this? Is this there the message in the political attack ad that I am seeing that says "So and So voted to give CONVICTED FELONS (omg, I don't think that's such a bad thing) the right to VOTE!"

[lys]

Oct 21, 2014 8:23:59 GMT -5 ttt said:

Oct 21, 2014 8:21:21 GMT -5 teengirlsquad said:

I'm confused by all of this - I definitely think all citizens (of a certain age) should have the right to vote. But how do we make sure only citizens are voting. I definitely do not think people who are not citizens of this country should vote in our elections. This shouldn't be that hard right?

Is there any evidence that people who are not citizens are even attempting to vote in our elections? 

I just don't think this is a real problem. 

I support ID requirements.
You do not think non citizen attempting to vote is a problem, and it may not be - AT THIS TIME -- but it certainly has the potential to become one. With modern technology  I do not see that it would be that hard to provide an ID to those who lack them - or help those without the proper documents to obtain them/ deal with home births/ old lost records etc. How many people really do not have a proper ID? It would not be a huge problem to fix this situation - without a constitutional ammendment.
To insure the validity of ALL the votes cast - you must also protect the integrity of the voters casting them.

 (one of the incidents of past fraud had a precinct with more votes cast than registered voters, another with about 40 ballots mailed to the same address (and no - 40 people did not live there) it does happen.  With a close election, even a small amount of fraud can make a difference in outcome.

With the privilege of voting comes some responsibilities --- among them to GET an ID, and REGISTER .  You cannot force people to be responsible. but you can assist those who have difficulties in obtaining and ID resolve the difficulties/obstacles.

[ttt]

Oct 22, 2014 9:31:44 GMT -5 lys said:

Oct 21, 2014 8:23:59 GMT -5 ttt said:

Is there any evidence that people who are not citizens are even attempting to vote in our elections? 

I just don't think this is a real problem. 

I support ID requirements.
You do not think non citizen attempting to vote is a problem, and it may not be - AT THIS TIME -- but it certainly has the potential to become one. With modern technology  I do not see that it would be that hard to provide an ID to those who lack them - or help those without the proper documents to obtain them/ deal with home births/ old lost records etc. How many people really do not have a proper ID? It would not be a huge problem to fix this situation - without a constitutional ammendment.
To insure the validity of ALL the votes cast - you must also protect the integrity of the voters casting them.

 (one of the incidents of past fraud had a precinct with more votes cast than registered voters, another with about 40 ballots mailed to the same address (and no - 40 people did not live there) it does happen.  With a close election, even a small amount of fraud can make a difference in outcome.

With the privilege of voting comes some responsibilities --- among them to GET an ID, and REGISTER .  You cannot force people to be responsible. but you can assist those who have difficulties in obtaining and ID resolve the difficulties/obstacles.

Do you really think this is worth raising taxes and spending millions and millions of dollars on? It doesn't seem like a very fiscally responsible position to take. 

Look at the study I posted - out of over a *billion* ballots cast in the past 15 years, there were thirty one cases of voter fraud. 

In a time where we as a nation cannot afford to fix bridges that are falling down, cannot afford to provide schools with enough textbooks, and have a huge amount of debt, is this really an important priority to be spending money on? 

[taratru]

Oct 22, 2014 9:39:57 GMT -5 ttt said:

Oct 22, 2014 9:31:44 GMT -5 lys said:

I support ID requirements.
You do not think non citizen attempting to vote is a problem, and it may not be - AT THIS TIME -- but it certainly has the potential to become one. With modern technology  I do not see that it would be that hard to provide an ID to those who lack them - or help those without the proper documents to obtain them/ deal with home births/ old lost records etc. How many people really do not have a proper ID? It would not be a huge problem to fix this situation - without a constitutional ammendment.
To insure the validity of ALL the votes cast - you must also protect the integrity of the voters casting them.

 (one of the incidents of past fraud had a precinct with more votes cast than registered voters, another with about 40 ballots mailed to the same address (and no - 40 people did not live there) it does happen.  With a close election, even a small amount of fraud can make a difference in outcome.

With the privilege of voting comes some responsibilities --- among them to GET an ID, and REGISTER .  You cannot force people to be responsible. but you can assist those who have difficulties in obtaining and ID resolve the difficulties/obstacles.

Do you really think this is worth raising taxes and spending millions and millions of dollars on? It doesn't seem like a very fiscally responsible position to take. 

Look at the study I posted - out of over a *billion* ballots cast in the past 15 years, there were thirty one cases of voter fraud. 

In a time where we as a nation cannot afford to fix bridges that are falling down, cannot afford to provide schools with enough textbooks, and have a huge amount of debt, is this really an important priority to be spending money on? 

Of course lys thinks that.  Because when all the ISIS sneak in*, they're going to use their huge numbers to infiltrate the government by voting their people in.  Then we're all in trouble.
*feel free to substitute Mexicans here

Your 0.000000031 percent voter fraud in the last 14 years is JUST TOO MUCH TO IGNORE.

[secretlyevil]

Oct 22, 2014 9:31:44 GMT -5 lys said:

Oct 21, 2014 8:23:59 GMT -5 ttt said:

Is there any evidence that people who are not citizens are even attempting to vote in our elections? 

I just don't think this is a real problem. 

I support ID requirements.
You do not think non citizen attempting to vote is a problem, and it may not be - AT THIS TIME -- but it certainly has the potential to become one. With modern technology  I do not see that it would be that hard to provide an ID to those who lack them - or help those without the proper documents to obtain them/ deal with home births/ old lost records etc. How many people really do not have a proper ID? It would not be a huge problem to fix this situation - without a constitutional ammendment.
To insure the validity of ALL the votes cast - you must also protect the integrity of the voters casting them.

 (one of the incidents of past fraud had a precinct with more votes cast than registered voters, another with about 40 ballots mailed to the same address (and no - 40 people did not live there) it does happen.  With a close election, even a small amount of fraud can make a difference in outcome.

With the privilege of voting comes some responsibilities --- among them to GET an ID, and REGISTER .  You cannot force people to be responsible. but you can assist those who have difficulties in obtaining and ID resolve the difficulties/obstacles.

If a criminal or teetorist wants to fake an id they can easily. Any law won't stop them from voting.