Informed Opinions on Today’s Topics : Should Motor Voter Law Be Implemented?

Gov. Pete Wilson filed a lawsuit against the federal government Tuesday in an attempt to stop the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 from taking effect in California until Washington has financed the cost of its scheduled Jan. 1 implementation.

Commonly known as the motor voter bill, the new law would allow citizens to register to vote when they apply for a driver’s license, welfare or other public assistance. At least two other public agencies, such as libraries and public schools, would also be designated by the state Legislature as locations to register new voters.

Long sought by Democrats as a means to expand the national voter pool, the motor voter law is aimed at attracting largely disenfranchised groups such as minorities and youths back into the political process.

Wilson and his supporters contend that the federal government is unconstitutionally imposing new costs and duties on states without the money to pay for them. Estimated costs for the law’s implementation range from $5 million to $35 million a year.

Should the motor voter law be implemented in California?

Harold Ezell, co-author of Proposition 187 and chairman of the Voter Fraud Task Force

“If we don’t first reform the California election system, motor voter will be disastrous. It does not do a thorough job in identifying who that person is who will suddenly register to vote. I’m not against making it easier for people to vote, but the problem is that, if you don’t require that an I.D. be shown up front, the dogs, cats and 2-year-olds can still vote. The privilege to vote should not be given away carelessly. Under the current system, you can almost become automatically registered without even a citizenship status check. Just because someone is qualified to have a driver’s license doesn’t make him qualified to be a voter. There’s a better way than to get people registered at the welfare office. Is that where you want to register people?”

Max Hobbs, president of the Verdugo Hills Democratic Club

“If it goes through, we would be a better democracy. The more people you get to participate in the system, the better the democratic process is in our country. If somebody wanted to abuse the system that badly, there are many ways to do that. Those sorts of things will happen from time to time and the people who do that should be prosecuted. But this is a democracy and people should remember that. This measure was passed by both houses of Congress and some of them were Republican. If they wanted to block it, they could have filibustered it. Now, it’s the law.”

Mark Di Camillo, director of the California Field Poll

“The public is somewhat unpredictable in their voting practices, so it’s merely speculation as to what impact any change in registration laws would have. One positive advantage is that since people have to, at various intervals, re-register, it would probably update some of the old address listings that are on file in the register rolls. We can also do “hard purges,” which means that people who are registered at an address they are no longer living at would be struck from the list if they failed to respond (to government mailers.) What Wilson is doing is a further way of avoiding to make the rolls more accurate.”

Janene Baluntac, legislative analyst for Assemblywoman Paula Boland

“No one can determine to what extent the measure would increase efficiency or voter turnout. What the focus should be is that we’re putting a bigger financial strain on California. That will impact everybody. More money will be taken away from parks, schools, libraries and other vital services.”