Archive for November 2011
Costs Outweigh Benefits for Voter ID Amendment
On Tuesday, November 8, Mississippi voters will consider the application of voter identification at every precinct in the state. Those in favor of voter identification argue that providing a state issued photo id will decrease voter fraud and reinforce the integrity of elections. The most popular arguments of the opposition deal with the possibility of lower voter turnout due to discrimination in race and age.
As a libertarian, I tend to look at cost before I look at benefits. In 2008, the Supreme Court looked at state imposed voter ID in Indiana in the case Crawford v. Marion County Election Board. In the majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens stated that voter ID was constitutional as long as the state offered the identification cards free of charge. Otherwise, voter identification cards qualify as a poll tax. If the Mississippi voter ID initiative passes in November, the physical printing and distribution of a new form of identification as well as the implementation of the new policy will end up costing the state one and a half million dollars a year. Are the benefits worth the cost?
Studies have shown that states that require photo identification in elections have little to no significant difference in voter turnout or fraud. “In [a] 2008 survey, three out of 2,564 respondents said that they tried to vote but were not allowed because of voter ID, a fraction of a percent.”[1] The only claim by either side that has any relevance is that some groups may not receive equal treatment by poll workers when asked for identification. “In the 2008 Super Tuesday primary states, 53% of whites were asked to show photo ID, compared with 58% of Hispanics and a staggering 73% of African Americans.”[2] The above data should be a warning for Mississippians to rethink their support of voter identification when they go to the polls this Tuesday. More unnecessary spending and possible discrimination at the polls makes voter identification contain more negative policy implications than positive. This is why I am voting NO on Initiative 27.
—
Richard Burke is the executive director of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi, an active member of Young Americans for Liberty Ole Miss, and a contributor to UMFreedom.com. He can be contacted at guitarhog@yahoo.com.
[1] Ansolabehere, Stephen. “Effects on Identification Requirements on Voting: Evidence from Experiences of Voters on Election Day.” PS. 42.1 (2009): 127- 130. Web. 21 Sep. 2011.
[2] Ansolabehere, Stephen. “Effects on Identification Requirements on Voting: Evidence from Experiences of Voters on Election Day.” PS. 42.1 (2009): 127- 130. Web. 21 Sep. 2011.
“Personhood” Amendment Wrong for MS
So you think the next key election will be in 2012?
Think again.
If you’re a registered voter get out your calendar and put a big red circle around November 8th. This is when Mississippi voters will be asked to decide ballot Initiative #26: The “Personhood Amendment.”
Wait a minute. Is “personhood” even a word? No matter. If Initiative 26 is passed it will suddenly become a household term as Article III, Section 1 of the Mississippi State Constitution is amended to define “person” or “persons” to include “every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.”
That would undoubtedly make abortion illegal. And much, much more.
While there are many Mississippians who in good conscience would like to outlaw abortion, this strangely phrased initiative doesn’t stop there. It could ultimately be interpreted to ban most birth control pills, Plan B (the emergency morning-after pill), various IUDs, in vitro fertilization and stem-cell research.
Not to worry ladies – chastity belts, diaphragms and the good old rhythm method will still be permissible. For the time being, anyway.
The government has no business selecting contraception for its citizens. Frankly, the idea that bureaucrats believe this is in their scope of power is horrifying.
It’s not as if Mississippi is The Chastity State. A recent study by the Mississippi Economic Policy Center reported 76 percent of high school students admit that they’ve had sex by the 12th grade. Chances are that number is actually higher. Moreover, we all know Mississippi has the highest national teenage pregnancy rate.
Some want to use these grim statistics as ammunition in an on-going argument for extensive sex education for students. Please. Public schools are educational institutions that should be teaching children academics. Period. In a state with one of the highest illiteracy rates everything else is superfluous. In fact, all sex-ed classes ought to be scrapped. Just as government shouldn’t inject itself into contraceptive decisions, neither should it take on the role of parents in teaching children about sexual norms and personal values.
Accompanying those deplorable statistics is an especially discouraging one: the Magnolia State also has the highest child poverty rate in the country. The cost of these social problems is steep: The Mississippi Business Journal reports that taxpayers are on the hook for more than $154 million annually due mostly to lost tax revenues, incarcerations and foster care associated with teen parents.
Given this dismal picture, it is simply mean-spirited to propose making access to contraception nearly impossible for Mississippi women.
The Personhood lobby wants you to believe that this is simply a feel-good pro-life measure. Don’t be fooled. There is much more at stake this November than a pro-choice versus pro-life vote. Once this initiative is enshrined in law, Mississippi women could find themselves forced to cross state lines for basic contraceptives.
Even more curious than the intentions of those backing this initiative is the timing of the vote. Remember, 2011 is an off-year election. The architects of the Personhood Amendment seem to be counting on low voter turnout to ram through this sweeping change to Mississippi law. It’s a clever scheme to rally their supporters to get out and vote, while the rest of the population sleeps.
This is an old political trick. Don’t fall for it.
In fact, beware of any political movement that can only succeed if the majority of voters stay home.
Opponents of the Personhood Amendment, such as the ACLU, are confident that even if Initiative 26 passes, it will ultimately be ruled unconstitutional and nullified. Great. But that will take years of litigation and countless taxpayer dollars. Worse, in the meantime Mississippians will have to live under a bad law.
If you’re registered to vote in Mississippi go to the polls on November 8th. Show the shortsighted “Personhood” lobby that smart people vote even in off-year elections.
And this time they’re saying “no.”
—
Bryn Kerrigan Mahan is a Senior Political Science major from Virginia Beach, Virginia. She is a member of the Ole Miss Chapter of Young Americans for Liberty and a contributor to UMFreedom.com. She can be contacted at bkmahan@olemiss.edu.
Why You Should Vote YES on Initiative 31
On November 8, Mississippians will head to the polls to decide three proposed ballot initiatives. One of these referendums, termed Initiative 31, aims to protect private property rights in Mississippi by restricting the government’s power of eminent domain. Governments have always used the power of eminent domain to acquire property on which to construct roads, schools, and other public developments.
Private property rights form the bedrock of a society of ordered liberty. For this reason, governments should prioritize the protection of private property second only to life and liberty itself. The justifications for a state’s eminent domain power lie in two considerations: 1) The state must provide adequate compensation for the acquired land, and 2) the land must be devoted to a public use. Using its power of eminent domain, both federal and state governments have purchased land from individuals to construct roads, schools, and public buildings.
In the controversial 2005 case of Kelo v. New London, the US Supreme Court vastly expanded the power of eminent domain. The case concerned a Connecticut resident whose property was acquired by the government using the power of eminent domain. Instead of using the land for a traditional public purpose, though, the government planned to transfer the property to a private pharmaceutical company. In a 5-4 decision that upended the world of eminent domain law, the court ruled that this was a constitutional use of the government’s taking power.
According to Kelo, eminent domain can be used to transfer private property to another private entity as long as the new owner will provide an “economic benefit” to the community. Using this logic, Peter the used car dealer could lobby the government to acquire your family farm. Though the farm belongs to you, Peter convinces the state that by opening a new car lot on your land, he could benefit the town economically.
Initiative 31 aims to prevent just this sort of crony capitalism. In response to this expansion of power, Mississippians have a chance to defend their private property against government that seeks to transfer it to another citizen. Initiative 31 would amend the state constitution to prohibit the state from transferring private property to another private individual for 10 years. This greatly reduces any incentive for the government to take private property for private uses.
Support property rights on November 8 by voting YES on Initiative 31.
—
James Robertson currently attends the University of Mississippi, where he plans to receive degrees in Political Science and English. He is the President of the Ole Miss Chapter of Young Americans for Liberty. He can be contacted at jrrobert@olemiss.edu.
