Restrictive Voter ID laws spread,

Fraud claims uncontested by media

By Roger Bybee

Among Republicans, it has been an “article of religious faith that voter fraud is causing us to lose elections," declared Royal Masset, the former political director of the Republican Party of Texas (Houston Chronicle 7/17/07) .

This faith about "voter fraud," even in the absence of any persuasive evidence, has most recently been translated into  public-relations and legislative drives to pass restrictive voter identification laws that have been enacted in 25 states, with other states looking at following suit. (Masset himself is an outspoken foe of such "racist" and "barbaric laws" (www.quorumreport.com/), a rare exception among top Republicans.)

But despite a potentially ominous threat to many poor Americans’ right to vote, the mainstream media has almost entirely failed to illuminate the debate.  To properly shed light, the media would have to do more than repeat each side’s argument, and present the available evidence, which shows almost no evidence of voter fraud .Further, providing context for the current struggles  would require discussing the long history of Southern Democratic and the more recent, post-1958  Republican efforts to suppress minority voting, resulted in a sweeping 1982 consent decree against the GOP that is still in force ( Lorraine Minnite, Phd, "The Politics of Voter Fraud," www.projectvote.org)     . 

Instead, controversies over "voter fraud,   as translated by major media, are commonly portrayed as mere shoving matches to gain partisan advantage rather than  a major battle over the meaning of voting rights in a democracy. This NY Times headline — Stricter Voting Laws Carve Latest Partisan Divide  (9/26/06)–exclusively stressed the partisan angle . While the Times story below admirably introduced the plight of an actual low-income voter into the fray, much coverage places such voters and the problems imposed by voter ID laws outside the frame.

Coverage generally portrays the fight  as between Republican proponents of the "voter fraud" thesis  and liberals who argue that the voter ID laws are aimed precisely at suppressing the votes of poor and minority voters who are likely to vote Democratic–with the threat to democracy outside the media frame. Pam Fessler’s NPR (9/12/08) coverage of an Ohio voter-rights battle precisely exemplifies this type of he-said, she-said coverage that bypasses the considerable evidence that voter fraud is extremely rare and that efforts to remedy this "problem" result in restricting the franchise (see "Caging Democracy" by attorney Teresa James, at www.projectvote.org) Fessler also neglects the well-documented Republican efforts to frustrate registration and voting by Democratic-leaning constituencies in 2004 (see Mark Crispin Miller’s Fooled Again, among many other sources). Fessler’s presentation gives no hint of this context: "Political groups are wrangling over voter registrations and access to the polls. In Ohio, Democrats and Republicans are fighting over interpretation of a state law, which Democrats say allows voters to register and immediately cast an absentee ballot. Republicans say that opens the door to fraud."

Often, the conventional media format advantages those making the most sensational charges regardless of their merit. "Barbs Traded on Va. Voter Drives" (6^/28/08WashingtonPost) begins by reporting Republican charges of voter fraud and ID theft perpetrated against a voter signed up in a registration drive. "Unfortunately, there appears to be a coordinated and widespread effort in Virginia to commit voter fraud," [the state party chairman Jeffrey Frederick] said.

 "Frederick made a public plea for people not to register when approached by a canvasser because of the risk of falling victim to identity theft," the Post reported. It is not until the eight paragraph that readers learn,  "Local election officials and police were surprised by Frederick‘s comments." and "They said they have found no evidence of fraud or attempts to steal personal information" by Democratic or independent voter-registration groups. It is not until the final paragraph that the reader discovers that the single instance of obtaining a voter’s Social Security number was reported by the voter-registration group itself. "We were the ones who identified the fraud and reported it to the board of elections," the organization’s director stated.

In the main, many media stories on the voter rights/voter fraud issue merely reiterate competing arguments without addressing the available evidence. For example, ABC’s Jan Crawford Greenburg reporting (4/28/08) on the US Supreme Court  decision that day backing the nation’s harshest voter ID law in Indiana,  blandly repeated Justice John Paul Stevens’ arguments "that  there was no evidence the law kept a single person from voting,"  and that "reaction split down partisan lines." She failed to note the paltry evidenceWashington State. (Huffington Post, 4/28/08) of voter fraud: cited by Stevens: one case in 1868 and a single case, more recent case of impersonation-style voter fraud in

But with a Justice Department tightly orchestrated by top Bush officials like Karl Rove, there was little fear during the Bush Administration that policies that discouraged minority voting would face federal challenges. However, coverage of the 2007 scandal surrounding the Department of Justice’s hiring of "loyal Bushies" and the firing of eight US attorneys focused overwhelmingly on the methods rather than the motives for "politicizing" the department.

 Consequently, an examination of 35 stories on the Justice Dept. scandal in major newspapers showed that only two headlines mentioned the "voter fraud"/ "Voter rights" issue central to the dismissals.  The other headlines stressed themes like "Hiring improprieties,"(Newark Star-Ledger 8/13/08) "tainted justice,"(Rocky Mountain News 7/31/08), "and "US attorney firings look more and more partisan." (Minneapolis Star Tribune 6/2/07)  The abstract wrong of "politicizing" the department was paramount, while the underlying focus of enacting measures to stop "voter fraud" was submerged.

Breaking out of the journalistic pack was a Miami Herald story (7/1/07) that summarized the results of the McClatchy newspaper chain’s investigation of the Republican strategy:

"This election strategy was active on at least three fronts:

§         "Tax-exempt groups such as the American Center and the Lawyers Association were deployed in battleground states to press for restrictive ID laws and oversee balloting.

§         "The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division turned traditional voting rights enforcement upside down with legal policies that narrowed rather than protected the rights of minorities.

§         "The White House and the Justice Department encouraged selected U.S. attorneys to bring voter fraud prosecutions, despite studies showing that election fraud isn’t a widespread problem

David Iglesias, the fired Republican US attorney general in New Mexico, said that he investigated over 100 claims of alleged voter fraud, but found no credible evidence in any of the cases. Iglesias’ experience with the non-existence of voter fraud evidence is consistent with national data. "Federal records "show that only 24 people were convicted or pleaded guilty to illegal voting between 2002 and 2005." ("The Politics of Fraud," at ProjectVote.org)

A Wisconsin study showed that requiring a state issued ID like a driver’s license would have a highly disparate impact on African-Americans Latinos, and the elderly.  "Among black males between ages 18 and 24, 78% lacked a driver’s license," one study of Milwaukee found (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 6/15/05). ,

Moreover, a study of the 2004 election directed by the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University showed turnout in 2004 about 4% lower, especially for minorities, in states that required voters to sign their name or produce documentation. (2/20/07 USA Today)

The Indianapolis Star (4/20/08), which repeatedly editorialized in favor of the voter ID law, was undeterred by such findings concerns:" The opportunity for fraud was clearly evident. "Indiana‘s law guards against abuses that have occurred in other states," adding Indiana‘s law gives ample accommodation to potential voters who are unable to obtain an ID."

The theory-that no one would be harmed by the law- was almost immediately put to the test in the May 6 presidential primary in Indiana. This Washington Post headline seemed to defuse the accusations raised by Democrats and African-American leaders and affirm the Star’s ample opportunity" claim: "Voter ID Law Consequences Mild in Ind."(5/6/08)  The article downplayed the  results of Indiana‘s restrictions on a group of elderly citizens:

"About 12 Indiana nuns were turned away Tuesday from polling place by a fellow bride of Christ because they didn’t have state or federal identification bearing a photograph. Sister Julie McGuire said she was forced to turn away her fellow sisters at Saint Mary’s Convent in South Bend, across the street from the University of Notre Dame, because they had been told earlier that they would need such an ID to vote. The nuns, all in their 80s or 90s, didn’t get one but came to the precinct anyway.

"They weren’t given provisional ballots because it would be impossible to get them to a motor vehicle branch and back in the 10-day time frame allotted by the law, Sister McGuire said. "’You have to remember that some of these ladies don’t walk well. They’re in wheelchairs or on walkers or electric carts’." (AP 5/6/08)::

A Nexis search showed that the nuns’ story was not reported in the Indianapolis Star, although at least 15 other publications around the nation found it newsworthy.

---