Email us!
Lowell Area Bloggers/Forums
Lowell Politics
Mass Bloggers
- - Leftyblogs MA Blogroll - Almost all of my favorite lefty blogs in Massachusetts can be found here. Linking here keeps my own blogroll short but still up to date! Below are some other MA blogs which are not listed at LB.
- H2Otown (Watertown, MA)
- MargeBLOG (Williamstown)
- Michael Forbes Wilcox (Western MA)
- The Gazebo (Worcester area)
Media in Lowell
- Community Connections The online archive of many of WUML's radio shows.
- LTC :: Our community cable access channel (8 & 10). Excellent people, I've worked with them before.
- Open Source :: Chris Lydon's new show, broadcast on WUML and WGBH locally.
- The Lowell Sun :: Love it or hate it, it's the big newspaper in town.
- WCAP radio :: Talk radio in Lowell - still locally owned, and in transition.
- WUML :: The student- and community-run radio station of UMass-Lowell. Lynne hosts a radio show, Thinking Out Loud, 10am on Fridays.
Media in MA
Other Daily Reads
Politics Online
- City Council Agenda Past City Council agendas, posted in a mostly timely manner
- Lowellma.gov Official city website
Progressive Local Orgs
Snark and politics
The Arts in Lowell
- 119 Gallery - Art gallery with exhibitions of many local artists, interesting events, and living, breathing culture.
- Arts League of Lowell (ALL) - Artist community group, a recent but welcome addition to the arts scene in Lowell.
- Brush Art Gallery - Come and meet working artists in their natural habitats!
- Cultural Organization of Lowell (COOL) - Great local calendar of events.
- Lowell Opera Company - Community opera.
- Lowell Philharmonic Orchestra - Local community orchestra.
- Lowell Poetry Network
- Lowell Rocks - List of live music events
- Merrimack Repertory Theatre - A local theatre "presenting an exciting mix of contemporary and new plays in historic downtown Lowell."
- OUtlET - Paper and online 'zine making a splash locally with events in art, poetry, music, and everything in between!
- Revolving Museum Contemporary, local, public art space with a plethora of children's programs and art by and for the community.
- The Fine Print - Socially aware, themed, arts and issues periodic publication available throughout Lowell.
- The Image Theater - Theatre company which puts on all original works by local playwrights.
- Whistler House Museum - A great collection of contemporaries of Whistler at his historic birthplace.
May 2nd, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Considering that Wilmingtom just had a disgusting turn out of under 4% of voters for locals..I would say that any opportunity to get folks involved is a good thing.
And yes, Lynne, I have been in that position, way back when we purchased our first home. Very confusing, as at the time (GOD forbid) I did not read the Sun on a regular basis.
May 2nd, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Add in identification at the polls for everyone on voting day and I’m all for it.
May 3rd, 2008 at 7:11 am
With this legislation, anyone registering at the polls must show the same type of identification that is required for our current system of voter registration.
May 3rd, 2008 at 7:28 am
Sorry Shawn, I don’t agree. I’m disgusted by the SC decision.
But yes, the same ID requirements for signing up to vote at City Hall are going to be required at the polls for same-day registration. The biggest impediment to this is training the poll workers, but really, it’s not that much of a burden, other states have found.
May 3rd, 2008 at 9:24 am
K-r-S said Wilmington’s most recent election turnout of 4% was disgusting is without merit. There were no contested races so it would be a poor use of time on the voters part. I cannot criticize rational decison making.
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:55 am
Point taken Pub, however, it points to a larger issue facing many communities, lack of folks willing to run for office and an overall lack of interest in local government in general.
May 4th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
I’m with Shawn on this one.
Lynne, don’t you think “disgusted” is a strong term to use for the SC decision?
I still fail to see how requiring identification is anti-black, anti-poor, anti-whatever. Please explain this one to me.
May 4th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
The Supreme Court’s job is to address constitutionality and I see nothing in the Constitution that prohibits requiring ID. I also agree with the Indiana law which provoked this case on the merits. Actually if IDs really worked the way they should and everyone could easily get them, as I certainly hope would be the case, then we can skip the registration step entirely. Show up, flash driver’s license or other legal ID with picture and address, cast ballot, done.
May 5th, 2008 at 9:18 am
Josh,
There are a meaningful number of poor and elderly people who don’t have government-issued photo IDs. If you don’t drive, or don’t drive anymore, why would you get a driver’s license?
I know, for those of us living normal, middle-class lives, it’s inconceivable that anyone could not have a photo ID, but not everybody lives like that. People in rural villages in Appalacia, or in poor inner city neighborhoods, or just old people who haven’t driven in ten years. Even if it’s a small % of the population, you can’t violate individuals’ rights on the theory that it’s only a few individuals.
If the government wants an ID to prove you’re registered to vote, fine; the government should issue a photo ID when they register you to vote.
May 5th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Funny Joe, thats just about exactly what we do.. just in reverse.
You go to get a license, or a photo id, and you can register to vote at the same time!
If someone wants the right to vote, they should be willing to administratively do what it takes to be able to perform that duty.
We’re not talking about reading tests or other tricks from the past used to disenfranchise voters, we’re talking about getting yourself a legal id (which anyone can do).
If someone can go to the town hall to register to vote, they can just as easily go to the registry and do the same while getting thier id.
As it stands right now, I could enter every polling place in Lowell and vote multiple times if I put a little energy into it.. thats what needs to be stopped.
May 5th, 2008 at 11:42 am
I’d be intested to see if anyone *has* “put a little energy into it.” Does anyone have any first-hand knowledge of voter fraud being committed this way? Is there any confirmed reports of sone one or some group having tested to see how much “energy” is required to do this? If not, that the whole idea of voter fraud is just another scare tactic without any basis in fact!
May 5th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Paul, one morning as I was listening to WCAP, a caller had phoned in and stated that he had gone to pne polling station to vote himself, went to another to vote for on his fathers behalf and went to another polling station to vote on another family members behalf. I’ve heard rumblings of this practice for years…
There are many folks that legitimately do not have state issued ID’s, for the reasons stated above. However, even if you don’t drive anymore, it should be a requirement that you at least obtain a state issued ID, not necessarily a drivers license.
Fact is, when one does not have a state issued photo ID, you may as well not exist.
May 5th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
But, back to the orignal post, I would advocate same day registration, as long as ID presented and checked against residential records. And if it is the case where a person rents, than they could provide additional proof of address in the form of a utility bill, rental agreement or lease.
May 5th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
You go to get a license, or a photo id, and you can register to vote at the same time!
And if you don’t go to get a license, you register to vote in some other way, that doesn’t require a photo ID. Like mailing in a registration form.
So no, not so much with the “everybody has a photo ID” thing.
If someone wants the right to vote, they should be willing to administratively do what it takes to be able to perform that duty. You know, like paying the poll tax, or passing the literacy test. FAIL.
Since the topic is “What should th administrative requirements for voting be?” is the question, “They should do what they administrative requirements are for voting” isn’t much of an answer. When people ask what the speed limit should be, do you respond with “People should follow the speed limit?”
If someone can go to the town hall to register to vote, they can just as easily go to the registry and do the same while getting thier id. You don’t have to go to the Town Hall to register to vote. People hold voter registration drives out in neighborhoods all the time. Buy you certainly do seem to have a broad understanding of the geography and transportation options in rural Appalacia, seeing as how you are mouthing off about how easy and cost-free it is for people there to run around to difference government offices. Tell us, how long did you live in West Virginia?
Hello?
As it stands right now, I could enter every polling place in Lowell and vote multiple times if I put a little energy into it.. thats what needs to be stopped. Unlike your skylarking about how everyone can get a photo ID lickity split, this is a reasonable point. Just let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
May 5th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
I have no problem with the requirement for a photo ID, as that may expedite the voting process by not having to go through the street/address check (twice). Maybe it could produce some election day savings by reducing the number of poll workers required.
However, for those that do not have a State issued photo ID for various reasons as stated by others, obtaining one should not cost them anything, as that basically amounts to a poll tax which was eliminated many years ago for the very reason of not disenfranchising voters based on money.
May 5th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
I guess the first question is “Is this a problem?”
Then lets figure some numbers: 16 million people in the state over 18. Figure some percentage of them are eligible voters… figure 13 million (probably a low guess). Figure not every one of these people will ask for a card, but many will ask for cards multiple times (’I lost mine’). Figure they need to be relatively tamper-proof. So lets figure it costs $5 a card to produce. That’d be $65,000,000. Not all of that would be spent the first year, of course. But then you have to figure on the overhead of administrating these cards. Someone would have to keep a database, which means techs to maintain it. Oh yeah… also hiring a software firm to design it. Of course that design would have to go through many oversights due to the sensitive nature. Did I forget anything? Oh yeah… these cards will have to have an expiration date, so re-issues will be regular. And oh, then there are the caging attempts that people might play (’he doesn’t look like the man in the picure… I protest his vote’.
So I figure that implementation is probably $100,000,000 to 150,000,000 in the first couple of years and probably $5,000,000 to $10,000,000 or more to maintain it.
So I guess the question should really be “Is this a $215,000,000 problem?”
I doubt it. And my estimate is probably low.
May 5th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Well,
Voting age population of MA is likely less than 5 million.
1996 2000 Increase Change
Massachusetts. . . . . . .4,652 4,749 97 2.1
May 5th, 2008 at 5:26 pm
According to the US Census, the estimated 18 or older population of Massachusetts 18 as of July 1st, 2007 is 16,276,365
May 5th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Check that again.
Massachusetts: Total = 6,449,755; Over 18 = 5,016,899
May 5th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
Your right. I misread. OK… so that makes it $25M for the cards to start. So figure implementation costs at $35M to start plus the costs of additional bureaucracy. Say $50 million the first year, and probably $5M to $8M a year to maintain. Still not sure its enough of a problem to justify the expenditure.
May 6th, 2008 at 8:15 am
Maybe investing in the integrity of the system would help to get more people involved?
The numbers seem exaggerated.. but they could be accurate (back of the napkin calculations), as most voters would just use their drivers license.
But then again, we could add another lottery ticket to pay for it..
And Joe, I have no idea what your talking about when you refer to rural Appalacia. I’m talking about Massachusetts.
May 6th, 2008 at 8:25 am
I’d suspect that weekend holiday voting w/ multi-day window would do far more for participation rates.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:14 am
Mr. Lynne,
Since most of us already have government-issued photo ID, there wouldn’t be any reason to issue voting IDs to 5 million people. It’s probably closer to 1-5% of the population that would need them.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:28 am
So you’re saying that a valid driver’s license would substitute for an ID? I though you didn’t need to be a citizen to get a license. Is there some indication on a license of voter eligibility?
May 6th, 2008 at 11:14 am
Thanks for bringing that up.
Thats a good idea.
The registry already has the facilities and resources. We can just add another database to record “proof of citizenship” as well.
May 6th, 2008 at 11:22 am
I’m not sure the RMV has the ‘footprint’ to be sufficiently available to people without cars. They certianly have the data resources, but I wonder about their efficiency and access as noted above. I think they’d be fine as a ‘primary’ servicer, but I figure there should also be a ’secondary’ servicer with a wider footprint. Perhaps town clerks. I think there would still be a significant infrastructure cost to worry about. They’d probably have to beef up their staff as well (how many times in the last ten years did you register to vote compared to visited the RMV?).
May 7th, 2008 at 8:27 am
See this?
Lacking proper ID, nuns are told they can’t vote
A dozen Indiana nuns were turned away from a polling place by a fellow sister yesterday because they didn’t have state or federal identification bearing a photograph.
Sister Julie McGuire said she was forced to turn away her fellow sisters at St. Mary’s Convent in South Bend, across the street from the University of Notre Dame, because they had been told earlier that they would need such an ID to vote.
The nuns, all in their 80s or 90s, did not get one but came to the precinct anyway. Some showed up with outdated passports. None of them drives.
They were not given provisional ballots because it would be impossible to get them to a motor vehicle branch and back in the 10-day time frame allotted by the law, McGuire said. “You have to remember that some of these ladies don’t walk well. They’re in wheelchairs or on walkers or electric carts.”
Nonetheless, she said, the convent will make a “very concerted effort” to get proper identification for the nuns in time for the general election.