LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF KANSAS DEMOCRACY BLOG

In debt standoff, voters' role also key

2011-08-01T19:28:00.000-07:00

In debt standoff, voters' role also key

By CHARLES BABINGTON - Associated Press | AP – Sun, Jul 31, 2011

WASHINGTON (AP) — Dear voter: Want to know why Democrats and Republicans in Congress find it so hard to work together to solve tough problems like the debt ceiling, health care and Social Security?

Look in the mirror.

Americans gripe about cowardly, self-serving politicians, and Congress doubtlessly has its feckless moments and members. But voters are quick to overlook their own role in legislative impasses that keep the nation from resolving big, obvious, festering problems such as immigration, the long-term stability of Medicare, and now, the debt ceiling.

Here's the truth: The overwhelming majority of senators and House members do what their constituents want them to do. Or, more to the point, they respond to people in their districts who bother to vote. Nothing is dearer to politicians than re-election, and most have a keen sense of when they are straying into dangerous waters.

For a growing number of senators and representatives, the only risk is in their party's primary, not in the general election. Most voters, and many news outlets, ignore primaries. That gives control to a relative handful of motivated, hard-core liberals (in Democratic contests) and full-bore conservatives (in GOP primaries).

In politically balanced districts, a hard-right or hard-left nominee may have trouble in the general election, when many independent and centrist voters turn out. But many House districts today aren't balanced, thanks largely to legislative gerrymandering and Americans' inclination to live and work near people who share their views and values.
The result is districts so solidly conservative that no GOP nominee can possibly lose, or so firmly liberal that any Democratic nominee is certain to win. In these districts, the primary is the whole ball game.

Republican lawmakers are under constant pressure to drift to the right, to make sure no fire-breathing conservative outflanks them in a light-turnout primary dominated by ideologues. The same goes for Democrats on the left.

So who turns up on Capitol Hill for freshman orientation? Democrats and Republicans who can barely comprehend each other's political viewpoints, let alone embrace them enough to pursue a possible compromise on big issues.
But what if a Republican and Democrat do decide to meet halfway in hopes of finding, say, a path to shore up Social Security for decades to come. What can they expect?
In some states and districts, they can expect to be drummed out of their party for the crime of engaging with "the enemy." That's what happened last year to Bob Bennett of Utah, a mainstream conservative Republican senator. A relatively small number of conservative activists, led by tea partyers, bounced him from the ticket at a GOP convention. They taunted Bennett with chants of "TARP, TARP." He had voted for the bipartisan bank bailout legislation pushed by Republican President George W. Bush. The Senate's GOP leaders also voted for the bill. But it was an unacceptable compromise in the eyes of Utah Republicans picking their Senate nominee.
In Alaska, GOP primary voters also kicked Sen. Lisa Murkowski off their ballot. She barely saved her seat with a scrappy write-in candidacy. Murkowski supported the bank bailout and, admittedly, is more moderate than the average congressional Republican. But her improbable write-in victory proved she is popular with Alaskans in general, even if her own party rejected her in the primary.
Tea party leaders spell out a warning in their periodic Washington rallies.
"The message is that we're watching, and we want you to vote based on our core values," Mark Meckler, a co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, said at one such event.
When Democratic leaders were struggling earlier this year to strike a budget deal and avert a government shutdown, Phil Kerpen of the conservative group Americans for Prosperity said sharply, "No Republican better help them." The crowd cheered loudly.

Such threats are mainly aimed at Republicans for now, largely because of the tea party's rapid rise. But Democratic lawmakers also know liberal discontent might undo them if they stray too far to the center.

"It's astounding how often some Democratic leaders sacrifice principles when critical issues are at stake," said a writer for the liberal AmericaBlog. The column rebuked Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., for working with the bipartisan "Gang of Six" on a debt-reduction plan.

A McClatchy-Marist poll this year found that 71 percent of registered voters want political leaders in Washington to compromise to get things done. If those voters skip key primaries, however, they may have little say in the matter. Political enthusiasts, whether they wear peace signs or "Don't Tread On Me" T-shirts, will determine who gets elected in many districts before a wide swath of Americans even notice it's an election year.

Except for a recently appointed senator from Nevada, every member of Congress got there the same way: American voters elected them.

People may bristle at the notion that we get the government we deserve. But there's no denying we get the government we elect.

UNLIKE CONGRESS, WE CAN TALK NICE WITH EACH OTHER

2011-07-29T17:23:00.000-07:00

Reminder-- you are invited to join us to SPOUT OFF (politely)
Sat. morning 10:00-11:30

Click on Picture to see how we feel about Civil Discourse

BRUNCH BUNCH

"COFFEE, CHAI and CIVIL CHAT"

on Sat. morning 10:00-11:30 at Mead's Corner, 415 E. Douglas--Wichta

Wichita Metro League of Women Voters

UNLIKE CONGRESS,WE CAN TALK NICE WITH EACH OTHER

All welcome.

Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader? Do You Know How Our System of Government Works?

2011-07-13T21:50:00.000-07:00

1. What is meant by Checks and Balances
2. How many levels of government does the US Federal System of Government have according to the Constitution?
3. Who leads the Executive Branch and what is its primary function according to the Constitution?
4. Who does the Constitution say established the Constitution?
5. According to the Constitution itself what words does it use to tell the purpose OF the Constitution?
6. What does the Constitution say are the three things that are the Supreme Law of the Land.

I have a request--really, a challenge--- to all the programers and gamers out there.

Recently, retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor shared on PBS that her
foundation was launching civic education games for schools-- for free. I, like she, am shocked at the lack of civic knowledge in our population. AND it is being cut out of schools more and more as districts frantically try to use all time to prepare for high stakes testing.

I am on a soap box shouting about the dangerous low in ADULT civic knowledge in this country but one way we have ignorant adults is to have LITTLE civics taught in the schools.

One of the school districts in our state has decided to have their entire elementary curriculum as math and reading next year. They hope that the math will include some science and hope the reading will include social studies. But these are NOT structured in the plan.

One third of all US students drop out before getting to the high school senior year course in US government. We are breeding the worst possible seeds for an ill informed democracy in this Petri dish of ignorance.

But I'm more apalled by the lack of civic knowledge in our adult AND VOTING population. People that demand to "return to the constitution" but don't know what is in the constitution seemingly.

I would like to challenge game makers to create games that teach ADULTS some of the basics of our governmental system, our democracy, our constitutional government. (and please, teach them to understand that gov. safety and health regulation is NOT socialism) AND make the games clever and interesting enough that it holds attention and makes adults want to play them.

I teach at a community college and our classes would be more than happy to test out your games.

League of Women Voters of Kansas www.lwvk.org

lwv.kansas@gmail.com

2011-06-02T20:54:00.000-07:00

The year 2012 is the ten-year time for each state to re-apportion its representation so that all districts have an equal number of voters in them. The census was taken and now the state legislature re-draws the lines. Will this be done in a fair and transparent way?

Check 2010 Census Data: Kansas Apportionment—Pick "Kansas" in the lower portion of the screen—
—Visit interactive 2010 U.S. Census Map—

There's No Free Lunch and There's No Free Voter Photo ID--We Pay and Voters Lose

2011-05-24T23:52:00.000-07:00

by Ernestine Krehbiel

President LWVK

On behalf of the League of Women Voters of Kansas, I strongly urged Governor Brownback to veto the very expensive and unnecessary “voter photo identification” bill just sent to him from the Kansas State Legislature. Unfortunately, he did not do that and the expensive and voter-supressing law is on the books in Kansas.

• Voters expected the economic crisis to be the first order of business in 2011, not voter ID.

This law is a prime example of wasteful use of taxpayers’ money that will likely cost citizens of Kansas millions of dollars annually. Kansans sent a clear message in the November 2010 election: They want responsible, cost-efficient government focused on building back our economy and jobs. Squandering precious taxpayer dollars to pay for voter photo ID, when our state has effective identification procedures already in place, will be seen by voters for what it really is-- politics as usual at a time when we are cutting essential state government services.

• Voter ID laws costs millions of dollars to implement.

In addition to the costs of supplying free ID’s to voters there are other significant costs that need to be addressed such as additional poll worker training, public education campaigns, defending against lawsuits, printing and mailing additional absentee ballots as well as additional cost to county and local governments that may need to extend hours of operation to accommodate voters who need to secure a photo ID. W hen you take all of these factors into consideration the fiscal impact quickly increases.

The cost of a Missouri law that did only half of the Kansas proposed law (no proof of citizenship required) cost Missouri $14 million dollars over three years. An example of how this foolish experiment hurts real citizens can be seen in what has already been cut in the budget, more such cuts will be required to pay for this voter photo ID program. Missouri’s cost in the first year alone was the same amount that is being cut for next year from Kansas that will cause the lost of hundreds of teachers, meals on wheels for seniors and the shutdown of all courts for weeks next year causing the release of defendants for lack of a speedy trial OR it may cost counties to hold them in jail longer before a trial.

• Numerous studies have found that the rare examples of voter impersonation are almost never the kind that could be prevented by a photo identification law.

There is no data whatsoever to prove this is the fraud problem that Kansas has. (An aide to the Secretary of State admitted that they could think of only one such case—a mother who forged her college son’s signature on an absentee ballot.) Indeed evidence proves that illegal voting is extremely low throughout the nation. At the Federal level only 24 people nation-wide were convicted of voter fraud in a recent five year period. Indeed, Americans are twice as likely to get hit by lighting as to have their vote cancelled out by a fraudulently cast vote.

There is almost certainly going to be a court challenge. US Courts have ruled that to charge someone for documents to be able to vote would violate the US constitution. (It would be a poll tax.) They ruled that states must provided free required documents. However, neither the cost of this photo ID program nor money to defend a court challenge has been budgeted. Already the legislature has cut funding for schools, courts, mental health, highways, prisons, etc. It will be a shock to our entire state system if the ID bill expenses begin to be implemented with free state-provided voter photo identification when this COST FOR FREE VOTER PHOTO ID IS NOT EVEN INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET PASSED IN THE LEGISLATURE FOR 2012.

• Voter ID requirements will add substantial new burdens on election administrators and poll workers. Introducing a voter ID requirement will require an extensive public education campaign, including mailings, advertising and public service announcements, and added poll worker training. There will not be groups such as the League of Women Voters conducting the voter registration drives in Veterans' Hospitals and nursing homes. Will the election staff expand to cover that?

This ID legislation requires eligible citizens to present a government-issued, current and valid photo identification at the polling place in 2012 and proof of citizenship (such as a birth certificate and marriage records of name change) by 2013 in order to exercise their constitutional right to vote. Research by the Brennen Center for Law and Justice has shown that 11.9 % of voters do not have photo ID at this point. At $18 per voter, the state will have to come up with an additional non-budgeted $200,000 for those voters alone; How much will tax payers have to pay for people to get free birth certificates that will be required by 2013?

There is no such thing as a free voter ID even if the state pays for it. There are significant on-going costs for state and local governments, as well as indirect costs for citizens who apply for the ID. The burden on the these voters should be considered also. It will be greatest for citizens for whom it is most cost prohibitive or inconvenient to take off work, get transportation, stand in line, and apply for documentation. Often these individuals don’t have the underlying documentation that is needed to get an ID. Rural residents must travel a long way to the DMV which may be open only a few days a month in the states less populated counties. Thus, this requirement would disenfranchise the very people who currently must work the hardest to vote.

• Numerous studies have found that the rare examples of any kind of fraud is not the voter impersonation kind. This law does not address other possible fraud.

What about voters that the new census says move every year within or to Kansas? When it is time to get their new, free Kansas photo ID, for these 184,292 voters where will the money come from annually for the state to pay for $18 each? (That is over $3 million yearly just for the “movers”.) To repeat, the Voter ID bill costs are NOT in the budget that already cuts health care, elder care, schools and other vital services. Governor Brownback must veto this bill and tell its sponsors that this is not a time for this expensive experiment.

In addition to the extraordinary cost, this new government program would disenfranchise tens of thousands of registered voters without a valid photo ID such as a drivers license due to disability, age, illness, transportation, or financial issues. In modern society, it is easy to assume that everyone has appropriate ID or can prove their citizenship. But it is more difficult than one might think.

The costs in time and money of obtaining proof of citizenship and photo ID will clearly discourage voter participation. Our state government should be in the business of making it easier for citizens to vote, not adding costly restrictions and hassles that will negatively impact voters.

The burden will be greatest for citizens for whom it is most cost prohibitive or inconvenient to take off work, get transportation, stand in line, and apply for documentation. Often these individuals don’t have the underlying documentation that is needed to get an ID. Thus, this requirement would disenfranchise the very people who currently must work the hardest to vote.

Any proposal that restricts voter registration or raises barriers to voting is a fear-based approach instead of a fact-based solution. Our state governments should be in the business of making it easier for citizens to vote, not adding costly restrictions and hassles that will negatively impact all voters. LWV of Kansas calls on Governor Brownback to reject this costly and unnecessary legislation.

Kansas League speaks out on voter id law

2011-05-23T00:40:00.000-07:00

Kansas League speaks out on voter id law

Submitted by Elisabeth Tue Apr 19 2011 10:42:00 GMT-0400 (EDT)

League of Women Voters of Kansas Statement:

"We are deeply disappointed but not surprised by the governor’s actions. This new law is a giant step backwards for voters’ rights. By requiring eligible citizens to present government-issued, current and valid photo identification at the polling place in 2012 and proof of citizenship by 2013 in order to exercise their constitutional right to vote.

"This new government program is a prime example of wasteful use of taxpayers’ money on a new program that will cost citizens of Kansas millions of dollars to implement a new bureaucracy – all in an effort to “fix” a problem that doesn’t exist.

"In addition to the costs of supplying free ID’s to voters there are other significant costs that need to be addressed such as additional poll worker training, public education campaigns, defending against lawsuits, printing and mailing additional absentee ballots. County and local governments will need more funds in order to stay open longer and accommodate voters who need to secure a photo ID. When you take all of these factors into consideration the fiscal impact quickly increases.

"In addition to the extraordinary cost, this new government program could disenfranchise tens of thousands of registered voters without a valid photo ID due to disability, age, illness, transportation, or financial issues. Our state government should be in the business of making it easier for citizens to vote, not adding costly restrictions and hassles that will negatively impact voters. The League of Women Voters of Kansas and their voter coalition partners will continue to explore all options at their disposal to ensure that all eligible voters can vote and have their votes counted."

WHY THE LWVK OPPOSES THE NEW KANSAS VOTER ID LAW

2011-05-22T23:53:00.000-07:00

We believe that the new voter Photo id law with the 2013 citizenship documentation is a bad law and may violate the us constitution. there must never be any cost to voting.

Kansas already has a commonsense voter identification law that ensures that eligible voters are who they say they are on Election Day.

In the last five years, Kansans have cast over 10 million ballots in elections and in that time there have been only six allegations of voter fraud and only ONE of those was a true fraud case—a US male citizen voted in Ks. and Mo.

To attempt to pass this legislation and supporting would be costly, time consuming. Legislators have REAL problems on which to spend their time – not this non-issue.

Birth certificates DO NOT MATCH the current name of a Kansas married woman who has taken her husband’s name. There are approximately one million in Kansas.

Nationwide about 11 % of all voters and as many as 200,000 Kansas’ eligible voters – mostly elderly, disabled, poor voters -- lack the government issued photo ID this law would required Kansans to present at the polls. Even students who are legal residents or people with expired drivers licenses

There have been no documented instances of in-person voter fraud in Kansas and adopting an overly-restrictive, burdensome law here in Kansas does not make sense. The state is over one-half billion dollars short for the coming fiscal year already. Spending millions to “fix” a problem that doesn’t exist is absurd!

Costs to a citizen can be a significant barrier to obtaining a photo ID. Even when the ID itself is free, there are hidden costs such as transportation to various agencies and fees related to acquiring supporting documents like birth certificates and marriage licenses for women with husbands’ last names.

A copy of a Kansas birth certificate costs $15 and a current passport can cost between $85 and $145 (From the U.S. Department of State http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/fees/fees_837.html ) depending on how quickly you need it. America does not believe that a voter should have to pay money to vote.

Elections cannot be fair if eligible voters are not allowed to vote.

LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF KANSAS DEMOCRACY BLOG

In debt standoff, voters' role also key

In debt standoff, voters' role also key

Related Content

UNLIKE CONGRESS, WE CAN TALK NICE WITH EACH OTHER

Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader? Do You Know How Our System of Government Works?

There's No Free Lunch and There's No Free Voter Photo ID--We Pay and Voters Lose

Kansas League speaks out on voter id law

Kansas League speaks out on voter id law

WHY THE LWVK OPPOSES THE NEW KANSAS VOTER ID LAW