Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Study finds strong evidence for discriminatory intent behind voter ID laws

330 posts in this topic

Posted

 

Demonstrating racial bias is not easy -- as I've discussed before, nobody actually calls themselves racists, because much racial bias happens at the subconscious level -- so the USC researchers developed a novel real-world field experiment to test bias among state legislators. In the two weeks prior to the 2012 election, they sent e-mail correspondence to a total of 1,871 state legislators in 14 states. The e-mails read as follows:

Hello (Representative/Senator NAME),

My name is (voter NAME) and I have heard a lot in the news lately about identification being required at the polls. I do not have a driver’s license. Can I still vote in November? Thank you for your help.

Sincerely,

(voter NAME)

The key to the experiment lies in that voter name field. One group of legislators received e-mail from a voter who identified himself as "Jacob Smith." The other received email from "Santiago Rodriguez." Moreover, half of the legislators in each of these two groups received e-mails written in Spanish, while half received English-language e-mails.

 

The researchers then measured the lawmakers' response rates to these e-mails. Crucially, in each state in the study, legislators really could have simply responded with a "yes" -- drivers' licenses were not required in any of the states in order to vote.

The researchers found that legislators who had supported voter ID laws were much more likely to respond to "Jacob Smith" than to "Santiago Rodriguez." This gap reveals a preference for responding to constituents with Anglophone names over constituents with Hispanic ones.

There was also an Anglophone preference among legislators who had not backed ID requirements, but crucially this preference was much smaller. This finding held true among legislators who received English-language e-mails, as well as legislators who received Spanish e-mails.

 

voter-id1.jpg

 

File under "N" for "No poo, Sherlock"

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/06/03/study-finds-strong-evidence-for-discriminatory-intent-behind-voter-id-laws/

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Poor Santiago :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This study didn't only look at racism.  It also may have caught on to politicians biases towards who they think would vote for them.  It should have included in the email a desire to vote for the candidate emailed.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That's settled science at work.

 

Shame a majority of americans/and North Carolinians support it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Those idiots (yes Del, I am talking about you) that claim having to show an ID to vote "discriminates" against anyone really do not even know the definition of the word "discriminate".

 

The law requires everyone (every race, gender, age, etc) to show an ID.  The SAME type of ID mind you.....and will provide you with a free one if you can't affor one.   

 

As such, the law ,as it is written, is the complete OPPOSITE of disciminatory.

 

Carry on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

i'm pretty sure i'm a racist

 

but i don't want to stop people from thailand from voting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

like voting matters....lol

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Those idiots (yes Del, I am talking about you) that claim having to show an ID to vote "discriminates" against anyone really do not even know the definition of the word "discriminate".

 

The law requires everyone (every race, gender, age, etc) to show an ID.  The SAME type of ID mind you.....and will provide you with a free one if you can't affor one.   

 

As such, the law ,as it is written, is the complete OPPOSITE of disciminatory.

 

Carry on

 

Well if this caucasian man says it is not discriminatory, then it must be true. You can all go back about your business now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

how do people get anything done without an ID? good thing we are up in arms about this...next take on the banks so I can get money without ID. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I was discriminated against when I came from Ukraine so I changed my name. Boom bitches!

I noticed while I was in college, people with American names more likely to get a job interview than foreigners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

grey hair on my head and on my face and I still get carded for alcohol, discriminatory for looking young.

 

 

but an ID for supposedly one of the most important things you can do as an American....nah we believe who you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Those idiots (yes Del, I am talking about you) that claim having to show an ID to vote "discriminates" against anyone really do not even know the definition of the word "discriminate".

 

The law requires everyone (every race, gender, age, etc) to show an ID.  The SAME type of ID mind you.....and will provide you with a free one if you can't affor one.   

 

As such, the law ,as it is written, is the complete OPPOSITE of disciminatory.

 

Carry on

 

Much like poll taxes were not discriminatory because everyone had to pay them!!

 

And literacy tests to vote was not discriminatory because everyone had to take them!!!

 

Those I think we can all agree were the exact OPPOSITE of discriminatory.

 

 

smh

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites