It's an interesting idea to make this, a push that may in fact seem somewhat self-serving (Clinton is of course trying to not only get you to vote, but get you to vote for her), but it's also an area that one could argue has taken a bit of a step back during the administration of President Obama. It's hard to argue that we have a problem at the polls right now, and not the one that FOX News would have you believe. Voter ID laws have become all the rage in the country, and more and more voters (particularly minority, poor, and younger voters, all of whom generally tend to lean Democratic) are more likely to be disenfranchised by these laws due to living in a different state than they may have a driver's license in or not being able to afford a driver's license (this may be an alien concept to some, but with more-and-more urban dwellers relying exclusively on public transportation to get to work and home, what's the point in paying money that's already tight to get a driver's license you may not use more than once a year). This has been an uphill battle of sorts for the Democrats, as having an ID at the polls is wildly popular in national opinion polls (you'd actually be hard-pressed to find a law that the nation disagrees with the majority of Democrats on more), but it's something that will appeal to groups of minority, poor, and younger voters, whom Clinton is hoping will turn out for her in droves this primary season and next November.
It's also part of a worthwhile larger initiative to make voting easier at the polls. One of the bigger pushes in recent years has surrounded concepts such as early voting and same-day or automatic registration, and I can't really get why anyone wants to stop this idea. Early voting is an easy, excellent concept (though I don't know if I quite support the 20-day window espoused by Clinton-I think ten should be sufficient, personally). The reality is that some random Tuesday in November being the only day to vote is ridiculously outdated and doesn't match our current lifestyles. People today have families where both parents work, where people frequently work multiple jobs and potentially evening or night shifts, or people who are single parents and can't get the kids out of the house. Having a ten-day window makes sense-literally EVERY other business or model to get more people to participate in something involves us expanding the opportunities to engage with the process, so why not this? The GOP is frequently trumpeting the wonders of the free market, so why is it that they won't embrace their concept of improving channels and access to products and goods? You can get a pair of jeans from a retailer in person, by mail, by phone, online, by having them ready to be picked up when you enter the store-why is it, then, that you have to vote during an arbitrary 13-hour period only on a midweek day? I would never miss voting, but I will admit that it's not an easy task waiting for thirty minutes after a long day of work to get to the polls, especially when I have other errands and chores that need to be taken care of that day. Early voting makes it easier to vote, and also eliminates some of the ridiculous lines that seem to result from Tuesday-only voting, lines that suspiciously and eyebrow-raisingly tend to end up in highly Democratic and minority districts. Extending the voting window is an easy solution, and one that should be UNIVERSALLY implemented across the country. I applaud the Clinton campaign's preemptive work to ensure that unjust laws in different states are overturned before 2016, ensuring more people have access to the polls.
I also think that we need to make it easier to ensure that you are registered. I agree with Secretary Clinton wholeheartedly that on your eighteenth birthday, you should be registered to vote. Men have to become part of Selective Service on their 18th birthday-it should be the same for all citizens to get to vote that day (you obviously don't have to vote, but the government should make it as easy as possible for citizens to participate in the democratic process). I also think that same-day registration is the way to go, and makes sense. In Minnesota, this has been commonplace for decades now, and we have one of the highest voter participation rates in the country-the tools are all there for someone to register in person to vote, why not let them?
I also support what may be one of the more controversial aspects of voting rights and Clinton's proposals, which is giving felons the right to vote after they have served their time in prisons. The reality is that while we certainly don't support what a felon did to land in prison, most Americans support a "they served their time" mentality, and I think that it's wrong to deny someone who served their time their ability to vote, particularly for those who were arrested for a non-violent crime. Ex-felons that are no longer serving a sentence are still subject to the laws and actions of the government, and should get a say in how the government presides over them.
This is because the name of the game here is more voter participation. The best way to make the government for the people, by the people, is to get all of the eligible people to the polls. This isn't something that should be a Democratic or Republican thing-both sides should want all of the citizenry to get to the polls so that we have an accurate depiction of what the populace wants. Presidential elections that 45% of the populace skip and midterm elections where 65% of the population doesn't get to the polls are an embarrassment. Part of that is on Americans not having enough civic pride to get to the polls, but a lot of that is on Americans simply not having access to them. Before you point your finger at someone saying "it's your fault for not voting," at least give them the tools to not have to choose between an extra day's wages and getting their voices heard. In America, we should ensure you can do both.
No comments:
Post a Comment