Voter ID Laws, Voter Fraud & Voter Suppression

Voter ID Laws, Voter Fraud & Voter Suppression

In the final weeks before the 2016 U.S. presidential election, we have seen an increase in claims about the social problem of voter fraud, and the threat that voter fraud poses to the legitimacy of the election outcome. Some of these claims-makers have encouraged concerned citizens to organize local “poll watcher” groups, whose members “monitor” in-person voting places for signs of fraud.

Check before you submit. Get Turnitin Score Report in 15 Minutes.

Don't risk the 'Red' score. Get the exact same Turnitin report your professor uses. Join 50,000+ students who submitted their essays with confidence this semester.

Get Turnitin Score Report Request Human Rewrite

These claims concerning the social problem of voter fraud have been matched by counterclaims that a) the concerns about voter fraud lack any factual basis (because existing evidence indicates that voter fraud does exist but is very rare and does not influence election outcomes); and b) the presence of “poll watchers” at in-person polling places serves to suppress voter participation, in particular the participation of registered voters of color.

Although these claims (voter fraud) and counterclaims (voter suppression) have gained media attention in recent weeks, they take place in the broader context of a wave of efforts in many states of the U.S., going back to at least 2010, to tighten voter identification requirements, e.g. by introducing new voter identification laws (see the NYU Brennan Center report linked below).

For this assignment:

1. Choose one state in which one or more new and more restrictive voter ID laws have been introduced in the state legislature in recent years (for lists of these states, see the links below).
2. In a 1- to 2-page memo, summarize the key facts surrounding the introduction of the new voter ID law in the state’s legislature
   1. Law introduced when, and by whom?
   2. Supported/opposed by which groups/organizations?
   3. Claims regarding voter fraud & counterclaims regarding voter suppression? Available factual evidence?
   4. Demographic & partisan political context? Which party controls state legislature and executive? Demographic composition of state electorate? How much political competition exists?
   5. Key changes the law would make?
   6. Outcome of legislative decision-making process?
   7. Legal challenges?
   8. Current status?
3. State briefly the theoretical perspective (I uploaded a file that summary of some theories, you can check it) that, in your view, is most useful in thinking about your case, and why.

Reminders/Guidelines/Tips

• Upload your assignment as a MS Word document to the Canvas assignment portal
• Start off your memo with a very brief (1-2 sentences) “roadmap” outlining the structure (“flow”) of your memo.
• Below is a list of possible sources on the history of voter ID laws and recent efforts to change voter ID laws, voter fraud, and news reports about these issues in the context of the 2016 presidential elections.
  • This list is not exhaustive – there are many more sources out there! You are not expected to use all of these sources, and you are encouraged to seek your own sources.
  • However, you are expected to be a critical consumer of information – in particular, of information available over the internet. For example, your memo should not rely exclusively and uncritically on information supplied by a specific “social problems actor” (e.g. claims-maker or political elite organization, etc.)
• Cite all sources
  • Given the limited space (1-2 pages), use the following citation format:
    • In a “Sources cited” section (this section does not count towards 2 pages), provide a numbered list of the sources you used. In the body of your memo, cite your source by simply including the number for that source in parentheses after the section which referenced ideas, language, information, etc. from that source.
    • Example:
    • (body of memo):
      • Some observers claimthat this trend might continue long after media attention has turned elsewhere (2). Others, who are more optimistic regarding the fragmentation of elite power, suggest that this recent shift is a small deviation from a larger downward trend (3).
    • (“Sources cited” section):
      1. Mischel, Lawrence and Teresa Kroger. 2016. “Strong across-the-board wage growth in 2015 for both bottom 90% and top 1%” Economic Policy Institute Website: http://www.epi.org/blog/strong-across-the-board-wage-growth-in-2015-for-both-bottom-90-percent-and-top-1-0-percent/, accessed Nov. 3, 2016
      2. Baker, Dean. 2016. Rigged: How Globalization and the Rules of the Modern Economy Were Structured to Make the Rich Richer. Center for Economic Policy and Research.
      3. Sassen, Saskia. 2007. A Sociology of Globalization.W. Norton Press.