The Problem with Voter ID

Jessica Corry makes some good points about the problems with Voter Identification systems in both parties:

Listen to political strategists and they’ll tell you they’ve got voter identification down to a science. They can trek down any street in any precinct and tell you everything from who voted for Bill Clinton to who has a son fighting in Iraq. The purpose, of course, is to help candidates connect with voters and ultimately to help them craft political positions that have broad appeal.

The systems, available to candidates in a particular party or state, compile voter information, including age, past voting history, party identification, and any other characteristics that can be found, including gun ownership, number of children, veteran status, disabilities, and economic standing.

At first glance, it looks like a good idea. Upon closer examination, however, it reveals gross inadequacies that promise only to weaken the art of politics. As in my case, voters are frequently just too complicated to put in a single box.

I used to be a believer. I attempted to utilize the GOP voter ID system in 2004 when I ran for political office. My campaign team decided to abandon such efforts, however, after we saw that identifications were frequently inaccurate – and thus offensive to voters. In cases where the information was correct, many voters wondered aloud how I’d learned so much about them. They were turned off that we knew their views on abortion or taxes or the local school district.

In the place of computerized walk lists, we launched a (gasp) old-fashioned campaign where we walked from neighborhood to neighborhood, talking with people not based on their political ideology, but on whether they answered their door.

I think she’s on to something. One of the big problems for Republicans last time was an over-reliance on Voter ID. Karl Rove and most of the GOP reached the conclusion that no matter what happened as long as we turned out more voters than the Dems we’d win. That turned out not to be true.

Voter ID is best viewed, not as a substitute for a campaign apparatus, but as a supplement to it. There’s value in the systems. For example, when I knocked in 2000 doors in 2004, it was an ineffecient effort. Had I known (for example) where registered voters were, who had voted in past primaries, that would have made things more efficient. As well, it can be helpful who is probably not going to be receptive to your message. When I was running for the legislature, I decided not to go to the House with the Kucinich for President sign in the window. Information like that is good to know.

But I would definitely not try and narrow everyone down to a few issues, and I certainly wouldn’t tell people their stances on the issue. I would tell them my stances and tailor what I shared in that visit to their concerns, but you have to always be ready. Unfortunately, human interaction is still necessary to our process.