| By Ramya - Dec 12th, 2007 at 1:59 pm EST |
| Also listed in: Campus Progress Blog |
Well maybe not...but Minnesota does. The state that brought us political giants like Paul Wellstone, Walter Mondale, and Jesse "The Body" is also one of the only states in the country that allows same-day voter registration.
An MTV video recently cited CIRCLE's (Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement) research which included this sweet fact:
Almost 70 percent of Minnesotans ages 18 to 24 voted in 2004 presidential election, compared to 47 percent nationally.
If every state used same-day registration, just think how overwhelming the youth vote could be.
Another awesome thing about the Minnesota voting process? To register, you have to show an ID (and a utility bill if you've moved and your address is different on your ID). Don't have a utility bill? Your neighbor down the street can vouch for you in writing. Since young people move around so much, this seems like a pretty great way to ensure that they get to vote.
!
Comments are closed for this post.
Of course, currently they can just register the same day, and then vote in the *next* election -- which, if they actually care enough, shouldn't be a problem.
Really, I'm of the philosophy that if people are apathetic mouth-breathers, they are that way by choice, and trying to coax them into the political process won't improve the outcome any.
I strongly disagree that those who haven't registered in advance shouldn't be able to vote. The idea of filtering those who do and do not deserve to vote is undemocratic and discriminatory.
Like it or not, the whole basis of the democracy is that everyone should have a voice and a say in their future, whether they pass your littness test or not.
It doesn't matter if they're less educated or passionate on the issues than you are, they still have just as much of a right to be heard and their needs have equal value to yours.
Well, yes, it's discriminatory. Some kinds of discrimination are bad -- discriminating against the serially unprepared, for one thing. When I'm in a position to hire one day, you can damn well bet I'll discriminate against the lazy and unprepared.
As for 'undemocratic', by this 'any filter is a bad filter' logic it's undemocratic to let ten year olds vote, too.
If they care enough, they have a pretty simple recourse -- register in advance. It is not magic, it is not voodoo, it is not hard.
""
Like it or not, the whole basis of the democracy is that everyone should have a voice and a say in their future, whether they pass your littness test or not.
""
Uh, no? First off, we live in a constitutionally limited democratic Republic, *not* a plain-and-simple democracy. We have checks and balances on power, and limits on in what way and how quickly any given person can 'have a voice and a say'.
A democratic majority of 51% is not enough to change our constitution, for instance -- the constitution is essentially a tyranny of the dead. And that's for the best.
Our Supreme Court judges also face no direct democratic test, and once they're on the bench they're immune from democracy entirely. Again, this is an entirely sensible way of doing things.
""
It doesn't matter if they're less educated or passionate on the issues than you are, they still have just as much of a right to be heard and their needs have equal value to yours.""
If their needs are just as valuable, then they'll certainly have an incentive to register ahead of time so they'll be eligible to vote in this election cycle.
I tend to favor any measures that permit eligible citizens to take a greater role in participating in government. But then, I'm a Stephen Breyer fan. Link
Warning: pdf and long review from the Harvard Law Review, but a pretty good rundown of the 'active liberty' concept.