[Vision2020] Voter Suppression and Political Polls

[Art Deco]

[image: Campaign Stops - Strong Opinions on the 2012
Election]<http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/>
August 1, 2012, 10:01 pmVoter Suppression and Political PollsBy CHARLES M.
BLOW <http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/author/charles-m-blow/>

Polls are the best way to find out who plans to vote and for whom they plan
to vote. But polls are imperfect. They ask questions of a sampling of
people - often about a thousand - and use those answers to draw conclusions
about the public at large.

This year there is a new wrinkle, one that complicates the picture and
could throw some of the polling off: the effects of newly enacted
restrictive voting laws.

Take, for instance, the results of a New York Times/CBS News/Quinnipiac
poll released Wednesday. "Likely voters" were polled in the swing states of
Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, and President Obama led Mitt Romney in each
state - by 6 points in Ohio and Florida and by 11 points in
Pennsylvania. President Obama carried all three states in the last election
and needs them in this one. Encouraging for him, right?

But let's dig in a bit and look at some of the variables that could weigh
on those results.

First, there are the quirks that always exist. It's August and many voters
aren't intensely focused on the election yet. Sixty percent or less in each
state say that they are paying a lot of attention to the presidential
campaign at this point, and these are states that have been soaked in ads
and visited often by the candidates. (On Wednesday, Obama made his 25th
trip to Ohio<http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-ohio-obama-20120801,0,840537.story>since
becoming president.)

People also tend to overstate their intention to vote. Many national and
state polls show that more than three quarters of respondents say they will
definitely vote in upcoming presidential elections. This is a major
component of the way pollsters determine "likely voters." But that level of
voting is not supported by historical
patterns<http://elections.gmu.edu/voter_turnout.htm>. According
to the United States Elections
Project<http://elections.gmu.edu/Turnout_2008G.html>,
the turnout rate for the voting-eligible population in Florida in 2008 was
just 67 percent, in Ohio it was 68 percent and in Pennsylvania it was 64
percent.  So many of those who say that they are definitely going to vote
actually won't.

Then there are the new voter restrictions that are likely to trim the voter
rolls and add tremendous voter confusion.

Pennsylvania has passed a highly restrictive photo ID requirement for its
voters. A study conducted by professors from the University of Washington
and the University of New Mexico found that more than a million registered
voters in Pennsylvania and 757,325 people who voted in 2008 lack a valid ID
under this scheme. More than a third of registered voters are unaware that
a photo ID law even exists.

This means that a lot of people who say that they are likely to vote may
not actually be eligible to vote. (Arguments in a suit contesting the
Pennsylvania law are being heard this week .)

Now to Florida and Ohio: both states have cut their early voting periods.
According to the Brennan Center for Justice, more than a million people who
voted in Florida and Ohio in 2008 did so on days that have been eliminated.

As the Associated Press
reported<http://news.yahoo.com/obama-campaign-sues-over-ohio-early-voting-law-200723120.html>about
the Ohio restriction in July:

The state doesn't track its early voters by party, so the stats don't show
exactly how much Obama might have benefited from early voting in Ohio. But
both parties are sure he did. An extended voting period is perceived as
benefiting Democrats because it increases voting opportunities for those
harder to reach for an Election Day turnout - Hispanics, blacks, new
citizens and poor people.

Florida has already moved to potentially purge
thousands<http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/13/florida-voter-purge/index.html>of
voters from its registration rolls. In May, The Miami Herald said of
the
purge:

Hispanic, Democratic and independent-minded voters are the most likely to
be targeted in a state hunt to remove thousands of noncitizens from
Florida's voting rolls, a Miami Herald computer analysis of elections
records has found. Whites and Republicans are disproportionately the
least-likely to face the threat of removal, the analysis of a list of more
than 2,600 potential noncitizens shows.

The Republican governor of Florida has also made it harder for ex-felons to
vote. According to a report last month in USA
Today<http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-07-10/felon-voting-rights/56137692/1>
:

The Florida Board of Executive Clemency, headed by Republican Gov. Rick
Scott <http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Rick+Scott>, reversed
predecessor Republican Gov. Charlie
Crist<http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/People/Politicians,+Government+Officials,+Strategists/Governors,+Mayors/Charlie+Crist>'s
policy that automatically restored voting rights to non-violent offenders
upon the completion of their sentences. Ex-felons must now wait five years
before applying to regain rights.

The newspaper pointed out that "the Sentencing Project, a group advocating
reforms in prison and sentencing policy, says 60% of the prison system
population is made up of African Americans and Latinos." It almost goes
without saying that these groups traditionally vote more Democratic.

Rolling Stone reported in
May<http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/florida-gop-takes-voter-supression-to-a-brazen-new-extreme-20120530>that
this could disenfranchise "100,000 previously eligible ex-felons" in
Florida.

It's unclear how many voters are aware of the new rules, and whether they'd
be able to vote even if they were. What is clear is that fewer Democrats
say that they are paying a lot of attention to the election in these three
states than Republicans, by a margin of 8 to 14 percentage points. It would
stand to reason that they might also be less aware of the new laws.

This year, we may have to take the polls with an even larger grain of salt
than usual. The greatest margin of uncertainty may well be caused by poll
respondents who *think* that they will able to vote for President Obama in
November, but may not be allowed to do so.

And it's all thanks to the Great Suppression
<http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/voter-suppression-and-political-polls/?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120802&pagewanted=print>of
2012.


-- 
Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
art.deco.studios at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20120802/c03b2a51/attachment.html>