Shaping Issues: News Media Framing of Proof of Citizenship Requirements to Register to Vote by Ana Kathryn-Anne Henderson A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Jurisprudence and Social Policy in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in Charge: Professor Kristin Luker, Chair Professor Taeku Lee Professor Cybell Fox Fall 2015 © 2015 Ana Kathryn-Anne Henderson Abstract Shaping Issues: New Media Framing of Proof of Citizenship Requirements to Register to Vote by Ana Kathryn-Anne Henderson Doctor of Philosophy in Jurisprudence and Social Policy University of California, Berkeley Professor Kristin Luker, Chair Voter eligibility in nearly every jurisdiction in the United States is limited to US citizens age 18 or over. In 1993, federal law established that citizenship and age eligibility are “proven” by an applicant swearing under penalty of perjury that she is citizen age 18 or over. In 2004, Arizona voters approved an initiative requiring documentary proof of citizenship in order to register. Four other states passed similar laws and an additional five states instituted administrative procedures to purge suspected non-citizens from their voter rolls. There is very little evidence of non-citizens voting, and in most of the few cases uncovered, non-citizens without intent to commit fraud. In addition, there is evidence that the laws in Arizona and Kansas prevented more than 50,000 people from registering to vote because their applications lacked proof of citizenship, and that administrative efforts to remove registered non-citizens mistakenly identified US citizens for removal. Nevertheless, the few public opinion polls available show public support for proof of citizenship requirements is high. This dissertation uses a content analysis of 181 news stories about non-citizen voting or proof of citizenship requirements to identify media frames used in news coverage of these issues. It finds that media coverage about non-citizen voting and proof of citizenship increased substantially after 2008 even though there was no increase in cases of non-citizen voting; this helped to raise visibility of the “problem.” It identifies seven frames in support of proof of citizenship and seven frames in opposition and finds that news stories analyzed were more likely to use supporting frames than opposing frames. In addition, it finds that most stories analyzed employed a “he said/she said” style of reported consisting of repeating truth-claims from advocates for and against proof of citizenship. This style allowed political elites to present their partisan frames directly to the public, usually without interrogation into the factual basis of those claims. Moreover, reporting style had a significant impact on frames presented, with stories that used a “fact-checking” style far more likely to present frames that proof of citizenship was not necessary and would disenfranchise citizens. Finally, the analysis of two examples from the stories of “valence framing” – different but logically equivalent presentations of the same information – demonstrate how media frames can influence public perception. 1 Acknowledgements I would like to thank the many people who helped me throughout the process of developing this dissertation. In particular, my dissertation Chair Kristin Luker, who was a great cheerleader in addition to providing wonderful advice, and Committee members Taeku Lee and Cybelle Fox, who provided probing questions about drafts of my work that helped me refine and improve my explanations. In addition, I thank Professor Sarah Song, who Chaired my Qualifying Committee and provided helpful advice even after my qualifying exam, and Professor Chris Edley, who provided his unqualified support when I decided to go back to school to expand my “tool kit” many years after having been his student in law school. Reference Librarian Ellen Gilmore of the UC Berkeley School of Law Library provided me with invaluable information on the myriad databases available, saving me many hours of experimentation to determine the best source of information for this study. This project benefited from input at the 2015 ASLCH Graduate Student Conference, and I think its conveners for including me as well as the participants for the many helpful conversations during that very snowy day in Washington DC. I thank my friends for their support, especially my colleague Katie Heard, who was great company for studying, working and occasionally commiserating over this long dissertation-writing process. Finally, I thank my family for helping me through the past few months of intensive work. I greatly appreciate the opportunity you have given me to complete this project. Thank you, Rand! i Chapter 1: Introduction In the United States, voting is limited to US citizens all federal elections, all state elections and nearly all local elections. In most states, citizens must register to vote in order to cast a ballot. 1 While there have been many procedures and requirements to register used over the course of US history, since at least 1993, citizenship eligibility was established by swearing, under penalty of perjury, that one was a citizen. However, in the late 2000s and early 2010s, some states started requiring “proof” of citizenship in order to register and vote. One’s sworn statement of citizenship was no longer sufficient; independent verification, through documents or consultation with state or federal officials, was required. The shift to requiring proof of citizenship was not a response to the discovery of widespread non-citizen voting. On the contrary, there was very little evidence of non- citizens attempting to vote. In addition, requiring proof of citizenship made it harder for citizens to register to vote, in some cases depriving them of their right to vote. Nevertheless, support for proof of citizenship requirements remained high not only among some candidates, elected officials and pundits who advocated for the change in policy but among public, as well. Based on the empirical evidence, public support for proof of citizenship requirements is counterintuitive. The available evidence indicates that the number of non-citizens attempting to register is very small and far outweighed by the number of citizens prevented from registering to vote due to lack of documentation. 2 However, the “facts” may not be the sole or predominant source of influence on public support for proof of citizenship requirements. This dissertation explores one possible influence on support for proof of citizenship requirements: news media coverage. The mass media can play a significant role in raising public consciousness about and shaping perceptions of and opinions about a given issue. This dissertation presents the results of my examination mass media reporting about non-citizen voting and proof of citizenship requirements. This includes exploration of trends in reporting over time to investigate whether the media’s “agenda- setting function” may have increased public awareness. It also includes the results of my content analysis of a set of 181 news stories to identify the “media frames” utilized when reporting on these issues. I. History of Voting Access: a Long-Standing Goal of Recognition and Inclusion 1 North Dakota does not require voter registration. In addition, California, Colorado, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Wyoming allow individuals to register and cast a vote on Election Day, and Hawaii will allow Election Day registration starting in 2018. See National Conference of State Legislatures, “Same Day Voter Registration,” available at http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/same-day- registration.aspx. A handful of local jurisdictions, mostly towns in Maryland, allow resident non-citizens to vote in local elections. 2 To use a medical metaphor, if proof of citizenship were a drug treatment, its “side effects” (large number of citizens disenfranchised) would far outweigh its benefits (prevention of a tiny number of non-citizens registering). 1 Voting in the United States is an important right, not just because, as the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized, it is “preservative of all rights,” 3 but also because access to the vote is an expression of citizenship and a symbol of national membership. Possessing access to the ballot – the right to vote -- validates that an individual is entitled to the full benefit of legal rights and protections as well as public goods and services granted to citizens; it is an indicator of what political theorist Judith Shklar referred to as “citizenship as standing.” 4 However, access to the franchise has been contentious since the country’s founding. Despite its democratic principles, throughout US history, various segments of the population have been denied the right to vote through a variety of means aimed at preserving access to the ballot to a chosen few. Limitations on voting access have followed larger power stratifications, most notably race, sex, and economic status. 5 Because of the important symbolic value of the vote, breaking down barriers has been an important goal for excluded groups and individuals, and these efforts have met with relatively high levels of success. By the early 1920s, for example, barriers to participation by women and those who don’t own land, were largely dismantled and have remained so. The history of racial barriers to the franchise, however, is more troubling. For African Americans, the history of access to the ballot shows that while one set of barriers were dismantled after the Civil War, new ones cropped up to take their place, effectively re-disenfranchising black citizens. For Mexican Americans, the pattern is similar, with early voting rights protected by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, 6 later eroded by many of the same Jim Crow practices that disenfranchised black citizens. 7 For Asian Americans, barriers to the franchise turned both on race-based prohibitions on their naturalization as well as some state constitutional bans on their participation.