about what's going on in
right now with this new law. voter i.d., it's broader than voter i.d. strict voter i.d. requirements but curtails the
period. it basically says if you're standing in line, if the polls close at
. or whatever it is down there. if you're standing in line at 8:00, you may not be available to vote. it also basically deputizes other voters and encourages other voters to challenge suspicious-looking voters at the polls. we're trying to pit neighbor against neighbor. honestly, seems like an awful piece of legislation but, lynn, if you go back and look at the history of
laws in this country and they date back as far as i can tell to
and republicans in texas in
. it was republicans who want
because it will make it easier for members of the community who couldn't get to the distant poll places. a bipartisan thing really until the last couple of years. what has happened on this?
a couple things that are important to think about when we have this conversation. first, it's always important to take disenfranchisement seriously. so, let's just stipulate that. but when you look back at some of the reforms that have been made to ease the barriers to turn out. and most of those are to do with registration. same-day registration, the
bill where you can register at the dmv and all those kinds of things and when we look at the effect of those things and the fact is that they increase participation but among the same group of voters who typically turn out in elections. so, the big effect for
was to increase the registration among white voters in the sort of middle and
. same thing with same-day registration. effects of same-day registration mobilize young voters. so, we're trying to get to that core group that has sort of been left out of the participation, left out of the process and all these reforms are not getting there. and, so, it's, i wish we could stop on both sides using scare tactics like
. and, you know, really talk about the fact that all these reforms have had very small effects. and it's really hard to change people's habits of voting. and that picks up on what liz was saying. if we start to get people interested in politics. interested in politics is a huge predictor of whether someone turns out in an election.
well, there's actually another provision of this
thing. a program to encourage to get
students interested in politics and to encourage them to vote and help them to vote. that's eliminated under this, too.
it seems like all the coalition that brought obama to the table that's slowly being widdled away.
, college students who republicans have lost in the last few elections. but in terms of
, i mean the instance of
is less than 0.01%' we created a whole set of laws now to essentially go after that less than 0.01 of a percent. but disenfranchise millions of people.
this is where i want us to be careful with the claims that we make. you know, just because you have an
period that's two weeks and you see people turning out for those two weeks and then you say, what happens if we shorten it to one week? it isn't just a take away that all the people who voted in those first seven days now will be disen franchised and won't vote. they will know that they now only have seven days and they will figure it out.
you looked at like ohio last year where they shortened the secretary of state shortened the
period and made it a lot tougher than it had been and we saw on the news these six-hour lines, eight-hour lines and i think the fear there is maybe the intent to vote still exists for people, but they show up. how many people can give up eight hours a day to vote? how many people should be asked to give up eight hours --
i think you're disregarding when you look at the totality of a bill like
, the biggest thing is how people process that and then what is their motivation? i think that you're leaving that out oaf the equation by saying it's not necessarily so and we have to watch what we say. people talk about a litany of things, including if your kid votes in college you can't use them as a
and if they don't vote where they grow up those things make people go, i don't want to do it. i don't want to discredit it. but the other thing i would like to say is when you look at these voter laws and you look at the greed of, let's add more, let's add more and unconstitutional thing, just like they did with shoving in all these
bills. taxpayers are paying for legislation that judges are going to block and then pay for that lawsuit and then if they're also paying for some organization that wants to fight the laws in court, taxpayers are paying for all sides of this war. and they should be angry about it.
all right, i have to cut it off there, unfortunately.
, we have to get him in. he said he was not surprised about the explicit photos and messages that surfaced this week and how about the reaction from