Tuesday, May 6, 2008

Did the Supreme Court give Indiana to Sen. Clinton?

Recently, the Supreme Court upheld Indiana's voter ID law. That ruling faced its first real test today. While the big news impact was the disenfranchisement of several South Bend nuns, with the Democratic contest so close, one has to wonder whether the law had an impact on the outcome of tonight's election. It does seem, at least preliminarily, that the number of voters being turned away due to a lack of ID was not significant, but given the recent press coverage of the Indiana law and Supreme Court decision, it begs to reason that some folks may have chosen not to go into the polls on account of lacking photo ID. There's some evidence that would suppress some of Clinton's strength in rural counties, but may have had much more far-reaching effects for Sen. Obama among voters of color. With fewer that 25,000 votes deciding the outcome, one has to wonder, did Crawford v. Marion County Election Board give Indiana to Sen. Clinton?

1 comment:

Julie said...

Possibly, but one can also make the case that the voter ID law primarily deters eligible Hispanic voters from voting, and Clinton elsewhere has done better with this group. My guess is that the ID law took more votes away from Sen. Clinton.