CALIFORNIA
FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2012, OR THEREAFTER
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2012, OR THEREAFTER
BY THOMAS D.
ELIAS
“SAME-DAY VOTER
REGISTRATION: POLITICAL TIME BOMB”
A time bomb that could bring major
changes to California politics has been set in place and is very likely to
become explosive before the next presidential election.
Right now, Democrats are licking their
chops over the potential benefits they expect from same-day voter registration,
a practice that’s been allowed in nine other states and will become the norm
here the year after the secretary of state, California’s top election official,
certifies a new high-tech voter registration database. That will take several
more years, but most likely will be done before the fall of 2016.
Same-day registration is a system
hated just now by Republicans, who say it will invite fraud even though ballots
cast by same-day registrants will be considered provisional, with election
officials in all counties having until the end of the election canvassing
period (about a month post-election) to determine whether new registrants were
really eligible to vote.
Democrats believe the new system will
provide them hundreds of thousands of new voters, perhaps enough to decisively
control several swing districts created in the 2011 redistricting plan devised
by the Citizens Redistricting Commission, which got its first test this fall.
They anticipate that myriad citizens
who have been uninvolved and not interested enough in government to register to
vote by the current deadline two weeks prior to Election Day will take heed at
the last minute and go vote.
Republicans, meanwhile, see the
practice as inviting illegal immigrants and shady sorts into the voting booth.
For one example, they ascribe the 2008 election of Democratic U.S. Sen. Al
Franken of Minnesota to “over 1,000 illegal Election Day registrations.”
Franken won election by fewer votes than that.
The predicted effects of same-day
registration are reminiscent of what so-called experts believed in 1976, when
California okayed unlimited voting by absentee ballot. Previously, absentee
voters had to certify they were either too ill to vote in person or would be
away on Election Day. The practice has grown to the extent that almost half of
all ballots here this fall were cast by mail, voters getting the chance to mark
their ballots as they made up their minds proposition by proposition and
candidate by candidate.
Republicans licked their chops at the
prospect of all those absentee ballots, knowing they had always before
dominated the smallish mail vote because the GOP has traditionally done better
among high-wealth groups that travel a fair amount.
That’s how it went, too, for the first
six years or so of unlimited absentees. Then Democrats learned how to stage
ballot-marking parties and began to send absentee voter applications to
targeted groups, many of whom were registered but didn’t vote very often.
Gradually, Democrats began winning more and more mail votes, until these days they
consistently take a majority of them statewide.
Might this work in reverse with
same-day registration, with Republicans figuring out new ways to entice party
sympathizers who don’t often vote to come out at the last moment? There’s every
possibility for that.
A similar delayed reaction was already
felt this fall from Gov. Jerry Brown’s 2011 signature on a bill allowing online
voter registration for anyone who already has a signature on file with the
Department of Motor Vehicles.
Again, Republicans lamented potential
fraud, as 22,000 persons registered by computer on the first day it was
possible last September. By the registration deadline, almost 1 million new
voters had been added to the rolls this way, mostly among people who found
registering in person inconvenient.
Legislative Republicans voted against
this step, but it may turn out to benefit the party in the long run, again
because of that wealth factor: It takes a certain modicum of cash or credit to
buy a computer and get online with it. That’s probably why most online polls
taken without randomized sampling come out favoring the conservative side of
whatever issue is up for question.
“If I wanted the ideal conditions for
voter fraud, I would select the California laws for an A+,” said Steven Frank,
conservative blogger and former head of the California Republican Assembly.
“Will these new voters be verified? When they ask to be permanent absentee
voters, will anyone ever check to see if these are real people?...All this has
the potential to end honest elections.”
But just as no one could anticipate
the eventual impact of unlimited absentee voting, no one can now be certain who
will be the long-term beneficiary of the newly liberalized voting laws. It all
depends on who comes up with the best system for taking advantage of the system
to register and turn out voters who might lean their way.
-30-
Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. Elias is author of the
current book "The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most Promising Cancer
Treatment and the Government's Campaign to Squelch It," now available in
an updated second edition. For more Elias columns, go to www.californiafocus.net
No comments:
Post a Comment