Are Long Lines a Poll Tax?
November 3, 2008
Rachel Maddow is calling long lines at early-voting locations a poll tax.
Maddow is right in noting that time spent in long voting lines is time not spent doing something else; she is also correct that everyone's time has value; and I would add that long lines reflect very poorly on the fact that the world's "greatest democracy" can barely operate an election. I do, however, question, who really loses from long polling lines.
If we make the bold assumption that a person's time is worth their full working wage, then we can calculate how much it costs someone to wait in a 3, 4 or 5 hour line. On one end of the spectrum, someone who is making a very low wage, maybe enough to barely get by, would be highly impacted by long poll lines in the sense that - even though they may only be foregoing 30 or 40 bucks - it might be a meal that they are unable to feed their family or the few hours per week that they do not get to see their family. On the other end of the spectrum, someone making a very high wage theoretically has the most to lose from a long poll line. A lawyer that charges hundreds of dollars per hour could lose thousands by standing in a long line. When Maddow references the hundreds of thousands in Ohio who intended to vote but didn't because they got "tired of waiting", it might be a stretch to assume they couldn't afford to wait because they are too poor. It might also be a stretch to assume they gave up entirely and won't give voting another try on election day.
The debate, of course, is frivolous in the sense that we could avoid it entirely by having an election system that actually works. There are options: centralizing national elections to the federal level of government; establishing a paid holiday for voting, or utilizing technology in a way that isn't horribly vulnerable and hackable in order to move away from the archaic voting systems we use today. The solution requires leadership and cooperation to prevent the typical partisan "cheating" that seems to be holding us back from making this progress.
Maddow is right in noting that time spent in long voting lines is time not spent doing something else; she is also correct that everyone's time has value; and I would add that long lines reflect very poorly on the fact that the world's "greatest democracy" can barely operate an election. I do, however, question, who really loses from long polling lines.
If we make the bold assumption that a person's time is worth their full working wage, then we can calculate how much it costs someone to wait in a 3, 4 or 5 hour line. On one end of the spectrum, someone who is making a very low wage, maybe enough to barely get by, would be highly impacted by long poll lines in the sense that - even though they may only be foregoing 30 or 40 bucks - it might be a meal that they are unable to feed their family or the few hours per week that they do not get to see their family. On the other end of the spectrum, someone making a very high wage theoretically has the most to lose from a long poll line. A lawyer that charges hundreds of dollars per hour could lose thousands by standing in a long line. When Maddow references the hundreds of thousands in Ohio who intended to vote but didn't because they got "tired of waiting", it might be a stretch to assume they couldn't afford to wait because they are too poor. It might also be a stretch to assume they gave up entirely and won't give voting another try on election day.
The debate, of course, is frivolous in the sense that we could avoid it entirely by having an election system that actually works. There are options: centralizing national elections to the federal level of government; establishing a paid holiday for voting, or utilizing technology in a way that isn't horribly vulnerable and hackable in order to move away from the archaic voting systems we use today. The solution requires leadership and cooperation to prevent the typical partisan "cheating" that seems to be holding us back from making this progress.
I like how Oregon does it. Simple and fair
I live in Oregon and I and everyone I know voted by mail weeks ago or has dropped their ballot off at a drop center at their convienience. Enjoy the lines!
in response to your argument that rich people are more likely to be deterred by a poll tax denominated in time, rather than dollars, I'm not sure that's really so clear. Certainly, a high-income person loses more money per hour spent waiting, but it doesn't necessarily follow that that translates into a larger deterrent effect. People with lower incomes tend to need those incomes more: a rich person may be losing a few nice meals at a restaurant in favor of eating at home, a poor person may be losing the meals themselves.
The simple way to solve this is to make election day a national holiday. There's plenty of precedent for that.
First, I don’t understand your point when you contend that people who make more per hour suffer more by waiting in line. A poll tax that is graduated by income is just as odious as a flat poll tax.
Second, the truly sinister aspect of these lines is that they are income related. In Ohio in 2004 the huge lines were not in the neighborhoods of rich lawyers; those lines were in poor areas of Ohio.
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen/6
Like the lottery, the long lines are a tax on stupidity--absentee ballots are available to all, can be filled in at one's convenience and mailed back at any time. No fuss, no waiting. What's the problem?
What's the problem?
They don't count the absentee ballots? That's kind of where your plan falls apart.
And the comparison, here, is faulty. The rich lawyer may lose thousands, but he's not going to lose his job. The low-income worker may very well lose everything simply for trying to exercise his franchise.
Yeah, that's a poll tax. And like the poll tax it exists to privilege white voters.
First, high wage earners are far more likely to be salaried employees, and will get paid the same no matter how long they wait to vote. It's lower earning hourly workers who lose money by having to wait in long lines.
Second, as to the point many are making regarding absentee ballots, this is a fair point. But different states have different rules as to what justifies a request for an absentee ballot. I'm not sure having to work would fulfill the requirement here in RI, as the state also requires employers to give employees time off to vote (not necessarily paid time off).
While I think Maddow is guilty of hyperbole here, there is no justification for making voting more difficult than it needs to be. That being said, I'd wait as long as necessary to honor those who have fought and died to preserve my right to vote.
The beauty of the American election system is that no matter how much money you make or how long you wait in line, your vote still counts exactly the same.
Imagine another instance when someone might wait in a long line. To buy a new iPod or Duke basketball ticket or anything else of value. The people who will wait in line for days, who will wake up at 5am and who will sleep in tents, are the people whose time isn't especially valuable. The banker, the lawyer and the pharmacist aren't going to sleep on pavement in order to receive one of these items; they will simply pay a premium and buy it second-hand. That’s just economics.
Of course, that doesn’t apply to voting, where you wait the same amount of time as the person behind you regardless of who they are. So yes, if long lines could be called a poll tax, it would be the equivalent of a flat tax. Whether that discourages more rich people or poor people from voting has perfectly logical arguments on each side.
I believe the real problem with absentee ballots is a problem of confidence. I had the opportunity to vote my mail but declined. Why? Because once I put my ballot in the mail box I never see it again. Between the time it leaves my hand it gets handled by postal machines and numerous postal and elections workers before it ever makes it into the ballot box. When I vote in person, I am putting my own ballot in the box, I feel confident that my vote won’t get lost along the way.
I don’t think anyone is disagreeing that the system could be improved. How to do it is the real question.
Can anyone actually explain to me just why there are such long lines and wait times in order to poll? I just don't get it! Is it the time spent checking voter ID etc that causes it?
I only ask because in Ireland (where i live), we have 60-70% turnout rates for general elections, we have no option to mail in our votes, and we have a far more complicated voting system (proportional representation). We also have far more political parties and representitives taking part, yet voting here is a 4 or 5 minute task.
For example, in a particular constituency here, there could quite conceivably be 4 major parties each with 2 or 3 candidates, and 10-15 small parties or independents also available to vote for. These are all on the same ballot, and you don't just choose who you are voting for, you then also pick who your second pick would be, and third and fourth pick and so on (you can stop at your first pick, but most people would keep going til at least 4th or 5th). You may also be voting on some other sort of referendum (proposition?), which would require a seperate ballot to be filled in. And this is all done within minutes! Why is it that in the Us it takes hours in some places to go through this process? I can honestly say that i've barely even seen a line form at polling stations here, yet we have a higher voter turnout!? I'm not trying to insult your electoral process, but it seems very inneficient or overly time consuming at some stage in the process? Either that or there is just a chronic lack of voting facilities?
This argument is pointless. It doesn't matter whether the lines amount to a poll tax that is more adverse for the poor or the rich. A poll tax that discriminated against EITHER would be just as odious and illegal. The law is quite clear:
The 24th Amendment:
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
It sounds to me that Congress needs to pass a law to reform the voting system nationwide. It is also clear that this is NOT a state issue, and needs to be dealt with via national voting system. Different rules, regulations and processes by State don't make sense anyway.
The Oregon system is a good one. If you don't feel confident mailing the ballot, or just prefer to wait until election day, you can just drop it off at a collection center.
Maybe we should allow people to pay others to wait in line for them! You could have a system like Ticketmaster...
it's awesome that there has been this "problem" of long lines all over... people taking a greater interest in public issues is always a good thing