The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Syndicate contentRSS

Voter registration reform risks enfeebling UK democracy

We could follow the US into electing an illegitimate government.

David Cameron walks with his wife Samantha as he leaves a polling station.
David Cameron walks with his wife Samantha as he leaves a polling station in London on May 3, 2012. Photograph: Getty Images.

I write these lines from the United States, where the public drama of the election campaign still has over three months to run. But the real election drama has been fought behind the scenes – and it may already have decided the next President. The UK should heed the lessons while we can.

For over a decade, the two main parties have fought a bitter partisan war over voter registration. At the risk of simplification, the Democrats have been trying to get voters on the ballot, especially among the groups most likely to vote for them, and the Republicans have been trying to keep them off. The Democrats did especially well among the 18 million or so new voters who registered between 2004 and 2008: an estimated two thirds of them chose Barack Obama. This year the Republicans are determined to prevent a repeat.

In 20 crucial swing states Republican governors and legislators have made strong efforts to keep voters off the ballot.  They have been marshalled by a well-organized lobby, the American Legislative Exchange Council, funded by the ultra-rich, ultra-conservative and ultra-secretive Koch brothers. Their prime targets are poor people, African-Americans, Hispanics, students and young people generally, and voters born outside the United States – all groups more likely to vote Democratic. One Republican legislator, Mike Tuzai of Pennsylvania, admitted openly that his party’s tough new voter identification laws were designed to deliver the state and its 20 electoral votes to Mitt Romney.

The Republicans have used four methods. One is to introduce new restrictions on volunteer organizations which conduct voter registration drives. The highly respected, non-partisan League of Women Voters has 70 years’ experience of registering new voters. The Michigan legislature decided that their volunteers required prior state training, although state training courses were non-existent.

Two crucial battleground states, Florida and Ohio, clamped down on early voting, especially on the Sunday before election day, long used by African-American churches to get their congregations to vote after attending services.

Five key states, again including Florida, introduced new measures to purge or exclude former felons (the tactic which delivered Florida – and the United States with it - to George W Bush in 2000).

However, the crucial Republican tactic has been to introduce stiff new demands for photo-identification for voters. As many as fifteen key states have done this. Their rationale is the prevention of voter fraud, although in reality this is extremely scarce.  George W Bush’s Justice Department hunted for cases from 2002 to 2007 and found only one to prosecute.

Republican measures target the 11 per cent of Americans who do not have the standard form of photo-ID, a driver’s licence. They tend to be young, or poor, or non-white, and to obtain alternative photo-ID they are often forced to travel to remote state offices with limited opening hours, and to pay large fees. The Republicans have also made it hard or impossible to use a student ID to vote. In Wisconsin they attached conditions to this which no Wisconsin college can meet. Texas bars the use of student ID for voter registration, but allows the use of a concealed-gun permit.

Some Republican states, including Florida and Pennsylvania, face legal challenges to parts of their measures, but the great majority are likely to stay in place in the run-up to the election. On election day itself, poor and non-white voters in Republican-held states will almost certainly find it harder to get to their voting stations than affluent white ones – a factor which helped George W Bush take the vital state of Ohio in 2004.

This month the Brennan Center for Justice produced a study of the likely impact of the most restrictive voter ID laws in the ten states concerned. It confirmed that poor and non-white voters were less likely to hold photo-ID than the general population, and revealed that 1.2 million eligible black voters and 500,000 Hispanic voters lived more than 10 miles away from their nearest full-time ID issuing office. It also found poor people likely to be deterred by charges of up to $25 for a birth certificate or a marriage license. It noted that the ten states concerned provide 127 votes towards the 270 needed to win the Presidency and concluded “the ability of eligible citizens without photo ID to obtain one could have a major influence on the outcome of the 2012 election.”

To put it more bluntly, the Republicans could win the election and introduce a fiercely partisan programme afterwards by denying millions of potential victims of that programme their right to vote against it. No friend of the US could think that a good outcome. These are the methods of Vladimir Putin, not the leader of the free world.

However, we in Britain have no right to lecture the Americans about electoral process and voter registration. The Parliamentary boundary changes would remove 20 non-Conservative seats before a single vote is cast, and changes in the powers of returning officers have led to the disqualification of thousands of votes on election night. However, the greatest worry is that our next general election could see additional millions of voters excluded from the already incomplete register. This would not be the result of partisan manoeuvring, but the unintended consequence of the government’s introduction of individual voter registration.

The House of Commons select committee studied this issue in depth last year. We received powerful evidence about the extent of under-registration not least from the impartial Election Commission and the Association of Returning Officers, who said up to a third of electors could be deregistered. Other authorities believe that as many as six million eligible voters may not be registered, rather than the 3.5 million normally cited. The non-registered are most commonly poorer people, especially the unemployed and those on the minimum wage, inner-city residents, especially in rented housing, and people from minority ethnic or language communities.

Individual registration could make this problem even worse and the select committee recommended a range of changes to prevent this, including a penalty for non-registration combined with a major public information and outreach effort directed at the groups least likely to register. We have the opportunity to get this right since the Bill is still before Parliament.

Without such measures, our country could follow the US into electing an illegitimate government from an unrepresentative democracy.

Graham Allen is Labour MP for Nottingham North.

16 comments

A Realist's picture

We have a voting system in the uk perfect for fraud. To begin with, the government should have knowledge of citizens and give them a voting slip, not the other way round. Anybody can write down at least ten extra people on their forms as these are not checked off against eligibility to vote. My two aunties, three cousins and two dead grandfathers can all vote if I want them too as none of them have to appear in person with postal votes. So the voting problem does not begin at the ballot box, but at the registering to vote stage. With the added help of technology, all the fake facebook accounts can vote too! Governments are all so dumb at technology and id fraud.In three years time, or before, any savvy five year old will be able to sway voting numbers through electoral fraud. I must persuade my fictitious auntie to be proactive and cast her postal vote. Otherwise that's a vote wasted! Boundary changes? When it's all put online, nobody will have proof of whether you live at your address anyway. So boundaries will be old hat. It's not done by council tax as all my relatives are lodgers!

A Realist's picture

We have a voting system perfect for fraud. To begin with, the government should have knowledge of citizens and give them a voting slip, not the other way round. Anybody can write down at least ten extra people on their forms as these are not checked off against eligibility to vote. My two aunties, three cousins and two dead grandfathers can all vote if I want them too as none of them have to appear in person with postal votes. So the voting problem does not begin at the ballot box, but at the registering to vote stage. With the added help of technology, all the fake facebook accounts can vote too! Governments are all so dumb at technology and id fraud.In three years time, or before, any savvy five year old will be able to sway voting numbers through electoral fraud. I must persuade my fictitious auntie to be proactive and cast her postal vote. Otherwise that's a vote wasted! Boundary changes? When it's all put online, nobody will have proof of whether you live at your address anyway. So boundaries will be old hat. It's not done by council tax as all my relatives are lodgers!

Tom Lister's picture

The best antidote to voting fraud is to increase the turn-out. Voter registration forms arriving through the letter-box outside of an election period are of course likely to be ignored or at least forgotten by many recipients. Having voted at every election including council elections for thirty years, I’v seen people at polling stations who have turned-up only to find that they are not on the electoral register, people who want to vote but can’t. New democracies use a stamp on the hand to ensure that no-one vote twice. In a developed electoral system, I don’t propose the same, but we should have some way of enabling everyone who want to vote to do so and to avoid the risk of fraud, which occurs when turn-out is low (such as council elections).
It seems ridiculous that in the 21st century we still expect people to register months in advance, and to make a special trip to a polling station in order to take part in democracy. Let’s find ways to enable people to vote by post, phone or internet. Voting for all and voting made easy.

SeptimusBrope's picture

Why not look to the Australian model? Voting is compulsory in Australia, and last year's Federal Elections showed 95% voter turn-out, a figure unheard of in this country.
No arguments about legitimacy down under.

Red Rain's picture

Offering no workable alternative is enfeebling UK democracy. 'The pot calling the kettle black' Labour itself have engaged in widespread electoral fraud. If we wish to strengthen our democracy we need to put an end to postal voting on demand system. This system is wide open to fraud and to voter intimidation.

hugh markey's picture

All paper-base systems are prone to error. Introduce bio-ID and this same intimate information can be used for any purpose including casting a vote.
A three-month digital check is quite simple and could be accessed at one's workplace or supermarket. This precaution would avoid over-eager political parties resurrecting the voter.
Census and marketing figures would be pretty near accurate as dammit. And we could be sure there is nowhere to hide. Polling figures would also benefit.
What have you got to lose(hide)?

Biodegradable Stats

Stuart Eels's picture

I really fail to see what the problem is, it takes but a moment to register. If you are too bone idle to do it that's your problem!

Indu Pendent's picture

Steady on. If we reduced the unfair bias out of the UK's voting system by redrawing the boundaries we might end up with a more fairly elected government.

Crikey. All hands to the decks and the Spin(ackers) to fight against that then, entrench the corruption of the system, be part of the problem and then blame the other lot for voters feeling disenfranchised.

gnorn's picture

Minor correction: states aren't allowed to charge "large fees", or indeed any fees at all, for identification documents required to vote. Such fees would violate the XXIV Amendment to the US Constitution (forbidding poll taxes as a condition to vote).

gnorn's picture

Minor correction: states aren't allowed to charge "large fees", or indeed any fees at all, for identification documents required to vote. Such fees would violate the XXIV Amendment to the US Constitution (forbidding poll taxes as a condition to vote).

Robert Taggart's picture

This country has never had a legitimate government - even the Attlee one of '45 only managed 49.7% !

gnorn's picture

Maybe you'd be happy with Stanley Baldwin's 55% in 1931.

Barrie J's picture

Dead people have voted in past UK General Elections without too much fuss from the three major parties.
This suggests the ability of a deceased individual to make his/her way to the polling station and cast their ballot barely troubles our 'democracy'.
Expect it to get a lot worse.

Toby James's picture

This makes some really important points. There is lots of evidence that individual registration will lead to a decline in registration levels. More needs to be done to improve the forthcoming legislation.

But the game of changing US election laws to maintain power is not as new as presented above. As i detail in my book ('Elite Statecraft and Election Administration') this has been a common theme for over 150 years.

It is not completely new to the UK either. New Labour ministers saw procedures such as postal voting as a way of increasing helping their ‘core voters’ cast a ballot.

Geraint's picture

This government is trying to use every trick in the book to cling on to power.

Lucidus's picture

Didn't Rick Snyder veto the Michigan bills?

dailykos.com/story/2012/07/03/1105714/-Michigan-won-t-be-suppressing-voters-this-nbsp-election

Latest tweets