Voter suppression: UK Voter ID

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Apologies for the pedantry but "gerrymandering" has a specific meaning - the manipulation of electoral district boundaries for advantage - initial data shows that voter ID has a similar effect, but is not the same thing.

What would be the appropriate term to use instead? It seems to me that if we widen the definition of gerrymandering slightly, then it's a well-known term which could cover this sort of behaviour without having to educate people into a new and unfamiliar term.

Gerrymandering is about shifting boundaries to manipulate voting by demographic groups. Making certain demographics more effective, or less effective in getting their voice heard at the ballot box. If you widen the definition to include other behaviours beyond simply shifting boundaries, then you've covered it. And people know that gerrymandering is a bad and manipulative thing to do. You don't have to explain to them that this new thing is a similarly bad and manipulative thing also.

 

[kensalriser]

I’ve not got a solid quote or video for this yet, but apparently Rees Mogg has admitted voter id was gerrymandering at the far-right Nat-C conference over the weekend (Twitter).

"Parties that try and gerrymander end up finding their clever scheme comes back to bite them, as dare I say we found by insisting on voter ID for elections.
We found the people who didn’t have ID were elderly and they by and large voted Conservative, so we made it hard for our own voters and we upset a system that worked perfectly well."

I did say before I thought this wouldn't have quite the effect the Tories were hoping as it would catch a lot of older people.

 

[Tony L]

How does voter ID checking enable gerrymandering?

Yes, the correct term is ‘voter suppression’, the title of this thread. I used ‘gerrymandering’ in that post as I was quoting an external source which used that word. I’ve still not seen video evidence of Rees Mogg admitting the class-warrior slant of the Tories chosen acceptable ID forms, and I suspect it is unlikely as whilst he’s bent as a seven £million pound note he will always lie in his own interests. This voter suppression is clearly that, especially given his own seat is at risk.

 

[kensalriser]

What would be the appropriate term to use instead? It seems to me that if we widen the definition of gerrymandering slightly, then it's a well-known term which could cover this sort of behaviour without having to educate people into a new and unfamiliar term.

Gerrymandering is about shifting boundaries to manipulate voting by demographic groups. Making certain demographics more effective, or less effective in getting their voice heard at the ballot box. If you widen the definition to include other behaviours beyond simply shifting boundaries, then you've covered it. And people know that gerrymandering is a bad and manipulative thing to do. You don't have to explain to them that this new thing is a similarly bad and manipulative thing also.

The wider definition of gerrymandering has been in use for some time. I lived in Maida Vale during the late 80s when Westminster Council effected the most blatant gerrymandering* ever seen in the UK.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homes_for_votes_scandal#:~:text=Legal action,-Main article: Porter&text=In May 1996, after long,"disgraceful and improper gerrymandering".

tl;dr Tory sleaze and corruption is nothing new

*in this iteration, the intent was to move voters rather than boundaries.

 

[paulfromcamden]

Conservative Party trolling has got the point now where I fully expect them to field a candidate at the next GE named Jerry Mandering.

 

[Tony L]

“Jacob Rees-Mogg Admits Tory Voter ID Law Was 'Gerrymandering'”

(Huffington Post).

 

[Seeker_UK]

What would be the appropriate term to use instead?

I think @Tony L covers it in post #303 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression)

The wider definition of gerrymandering has been in use for some time. I lived in Maida Vale during the late 80s when Westminster Council effected the most blatant gerrymandering* ever seen in the UK.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homes_for_votes_scandal#:~:text=Legal action,-Main article: Porter&text=In May 1996, after long,"disgraceful and improper gerrymandering".

tl;dr Tory sleaze and corruption is nothing new

*in this iteration, the intent was to move voters rather than boundaries.

That fits within the current definition under "cracking" and "packing" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering#Tactics). Voter ID enforcement isn;t moving anyone or anything.

[Edit]

JR-M clearly doesn't understand the meaning either.

 

[Tony L]

“Don’t want to go over the top, but this is absolutely jaw-dropping. Someone who was in the cabinet when legislation on voter ID was agreed and went through parliament acknowledges it WAS an attempt to gerrymander the elections”

Journalist Jon Sopel on Rees Mogg’s statement on Tory mandated voter ID (Twitter).

 

[gavreid]

What would be the appropriate term to use instead? It seems to me that if we widen the definition of gerrymandering slightly, then it's a well-known term which could cover this sort of behaviour without having to educate people into a new and unfamiliar term.

Gerrymandering is about shifting boundaries to manipulate voting by demographic groups. Making certain demographics more effective, or less effective in getting their voice heard at the ballot box. If you widen the definition to include other behaviours beyond simply shifting boundaries, then you've covered it. And people know that gerrymandering is a bad and manipulative thing to do. You don't have to explain to them that this new thing is a similarly bad and manipulative thing also.

Its use has become broader in English anyway. Remember Westmister Council's Homes For Votes scandal? That was manipulation within existing boundaries but it was still described as Gerrymandering. Shirleymandering even! Voter suppression of the id kind has the same effect. Language is always evolving.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homes_for_votes_scandal

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

In this context, is there a meaningful difference between 'gerrymandering' and 'voter suppression'?

Gerrymandering is about manipulating the relative strengths of support for a given party, within a ward or constituency. Done by either adjusting boundaries to include or exclude blocs of support for one party, or actually relocating blocs of people. Voter suppression is about manipulating the relative strengths of support for a given party, by adjusting the turnout or eligibility of specific blocs of voters.

 

[Tony L]

If Jacob Rees Mogg wants to state on the record his party uses gerrymandering techniques I’ll happily take that! He can use that word if he wishes!

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

If Jacob Rees Mogg wants to state on the record his party uses gerrymandering techniques I’ll happily take that! He can use that word if he wishes!

What I am astonished by is that these people actually seem to think that talking about this stuff in the open, is OK. I'm rather glad they do, obviously, but it says something about their mindset that they are so unguarded at times. Presumably, Rees-Mogg considered himself among friends at the Nat-C shindig and let his guard down.

 

[Tony L]

What I am astonished by is that these people actually seem to think that talking about this stuff in the open, is OK. I'm rather glad they do, obviously, but it says something about their mindset that they are so unguarded at times. Presumably, Rees-Mogg considered himself among friends at the Nat-C shindig and let his guard down.

It is right out in the open now. We are living in a Trump/Qanon post-truth post-decency world. Rees Mogg is no more or less of a nut-job than MTG, Boebart, Kevin McCarthy etc, and Lee Anderson is itching to be Ron DeSantis. That level of cruelty is all they have left to sell.

It is here. Fascism has fully arrived in the UK.

 

[Paul R]

Yet there is no moral difference between introducing voter ID in the hope of excluding voters who tend to vote in one way and extending the franchise to those too young to drink or non-citizens in the expectation they will tend to vote the other.

Voter ID has the cover of preventing fraud, Labour's proposals are pure 'gerrymandering'. I'm not sure ceding the high ground here is politically astute. Not to mention the irony of offering EU citizens a right they do not have inside the EU.

 

[billo]

Yet there is no moral difference between introducing voter ID in the hope of excluding voters who tend to vote in one way and extending the franchise to those too young to drink or non-citizens in the expectation they will tend to vote the other.

Voter ID has the cover of preventing fraud, Labour's proposals are pure 'gerrymandering'. I'm not sure ceding the high ground here is politically astute. Not to mention the irony of offering EU citizens a right they do not have inside the EU.

No taxation without representation.
EU citizens living here and paying taxes here are already allowed to vote in local elections, so it's no great leap

 

[Tony L]

Voter ID has the cover of preventing fraud, Labour's proposals are pure 'gerrymandering'. I'm not sure ceding the high ground here is politically astute. Not to mention the irony of offering EU citizens a right they do not have inside the EU.

I’m not a Labour voter. As someone on the furthest extremes of the conspiracy theory wing of the Tory Party you are however up to your neck in this. I just want to live in a fair and transparent proportional democracy without any of your public school elites rigging all the rules.

 

[gavreid]

I’m not a Labour voter. As someone on the furthest extremes of the conspiracy theory wing of the Tory Party you are however up to your neck in this. I just want to live in a fair and transparent proportional democracy without any of your public school elites rigging all the rules.

Was lowering the voting age to 18 from 21 in 1969 gerrymandering? I've never heard it called that, it was part of an international move around the time, after all large numbers of people were working and paying tax from 16. No doubt the odd Tory didn't like it as with universal franchise. The move to 16 is certainly part of an international debate. I was mature enough to vote at 12 or 13 I'd say some people still are not at 80

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_age

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Yet there is no moral difference between introducing voter ID in the hope of excluding voters who tend to vote in one way and extending the franchise to those too young to drink or non-citizens in the expectation they will tend to vote the other.

Voter ID has the cover of preventing fraud, Labour's proposals are pure 'gerrymandering'. I'm not sure ceding the high ground here is politically astute. Not to mention the irony of offering EU citizens a right they do not have inside the EU.

By your argument, female suffrage, or giving the right to all adults was gerrymandering. The moral difference is that one proposal is giving a group a right (which they should arguably have had anyway) whereas the other is an attempt to deny or nullify that right. I’d say there’s a gulf of moral difference.

 

[Tony L]

Was lowering the voting age to 18 from 21 in 1969 gerrymandering? I've never heard it called that, it was part of an international move around the time, after all people were working at paying tax from 16. No doubt the odd Tory didn't like it. The move to 16 is certainly part of an international debate. I was mature enough to vote at 12 or 13 I'd say some people still are not at 80

I believe lowering the voting age is long overdue. Given the length of a political term in the UK a person can be well into their 20s before having the right to cast a vote, i.e. they are being taxed, policed etc without representation.

I’d like to see the age reduced to 15. That would average out at around 17, which is about right, though someone with bad luck could still find themselves disenfranchised until almost 20. Young folk with a whole life ahead of them have by far the largest stake in any society from any logical perspective. They are the ones expected to work to pay old people’s pensions, healthcare etc. Denying them the vote is just wrong on any level.

I have nothing whatsoever to fear from real democracy and political accountability. I am not a Tory!

 

[kensalriser]

The problem with the 16-18 age group legally is that it's a kind of no man's land between childhood and adulthood. Contracts are not enforceable on under 18s, but at 16 you can get married, work a full time and pay income tax, join the army. That being the case, 16 doesn't strike me as at all unreasonable, especially given that anyone voting on their 16th birthday will be participating in the election of a government that won't even be half way through its term when they turn 18.