Voter Registration Reality: A View From the Social Work Field

by Madeline Perez De Jesus, PhD, MPhil, and Cindy Dubuque-Gallo, LMSW, MAT

     On September 22, 2020, we excitedly left our respective classrooms and comfort zones to join with social work students and faculty around the country to register voters. It was National Voter Registration Day (NVRD), and as new members of the non-partisan National Social Work Mobilization Campaign (Voting is Social Work), we jumped into action.

     Inspired by voter activism around the country, dozens of student volunteers  at our schools set out to register classmates, clients, and community members in person. Equipped with masks, hand sanitizer, and clipboards, they addressed the complexities of COVID. Other student interns engaged virtually by leading video presentations at their agencies. As social work educators, we also spoke to National Association of Social Workers chapters on ways to integrate voter engagement with individuals and communities.

     The response was more mixed than we expected. We ran into reluctance and misinformation compounded by COVID-19 and voter suppression. Despite the offer of extra class credit and released field time, some students still were hesitant. Despite access to sample classroom and field assignments made available by the Voting Is Social Work website, some faculty struggled to see how voter registration work “fit” in practice courses and fieldwork, often-citing lack of time and/or questioning the relevance of voting to social work practice.  

     Prepared to address these concerns, we drew on engagement tactics developed by the Voting Is Social Work campaign. For every person who said they had registered and were “all set,” we invited them to register three friends or to remind other people to vote. For every person who expressed dissatisfaction with the candidates, we redirected the conversation to “the issues.” For every person concerned about the long poll lines and increased health risks, we offered an absentee ballot application.

     COVID-19 and increased voter suppression efforts created both opportunities and challenges. The pandemic provided opportunities to utilize technology in new ways, such as multiple online voter registration platforms and the telehealth platforms and QR Codes used by VotER and others. At the same time, fear of contracting and spreading the virus understandably limited direct personal engagement with potential voters. Finally, the accelerated introduction of mean-spirited and undemocratic voter suppression tactics -- targeted especially to people of color -- in states around the country took its toll. To highlight this problem, we often reminded people of poll taxes, identification policies, and literacy exams used to suppress the voter in earlier times and identified ways to bypass these barriers.  

     At the end of the day, the NVRD challenges only strengthened our resolve to promote the “fit” and ”relevance” of voter engagement to social work. Voter engagement supports the social justice values and mission articulated by the National Association of Social Workers and the Council on Social Work Education, and it reinforces our ethical values, core practice skills (NASW, 2018; CSWE, 2015), and core competencies. Voting is both an individual and a collective action; it enhances individual well-being (Brown, et al, 2020), brings more resources to communities (Martin, 2003), and amplifies the political voice of the social work profession (NASW, 2020).

     Our NVRD experience also highlighted the important role played by institutional leadership and support in helping faculty and agency staff to view voter engagement as “essential” to their other work rather than as an “extra.” We suspect that the race, class, and gender disparities laid bare by COVID-19 and the Black Lives Matter movement motivated more social workers than in the past to  overcome the fears, barriers, hesitations, and false myths that for decades have led social workers to view voter engagement on the job as illegal, partisan, and unprofessional (Abramovitz et al., 2019). We are heartened that more and more social workers today understand that voting builds political power and, therefore, that voting is social work and social justice work. 

References  

Abramovitz, M., Sherraden, M., Hill, K., Rhodes Smith, T., Lewis, B., & Mizrahi, T. (2019). Voting Is Social Work: Voices from the National Social Work Voter Mobilization Campaign. Journal of Social Work Education.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2019.1656690

Brown, C. L., Raza, D., & Pinto, A. D. Voting, health and interventions in healthcare settings: A scoping review. Public Health Review, 41, 16 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40985-020-00133-6

Council on Social Work Education (CSWE). (2015). Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards. https://www.cswe.org/getattachment/Accreditation/Standards-and-Policies/2015-EPAS/2015EPASandGlossary.pdf.aspx

Martin, P. S. (2003). Voting’s rewards: Voter turnout, attentive publics, and congressional allocation of federal money. American Journal of Political Science, 47(1), 110-127.

National Association of Social Workers (NASW). (2020). Increasing Voter Participation. https://www.socialworkers.org/Advocacy/Social-Justice/Increasing-Voter-Participation

National Association of Social Workers. (2018). https://www.socialworkers.org/About/Ethics/Code-of-Ethics/Code-of-Ethics-English

The National Social Work Voter Mobilization Campaign: Voting is Social Work. https://www.votingissocialwork.org

Madeline Perez De Jesus, PhD, MPhil, is an associate professor in social work at the University of Saint Joseph. Madeline’s research focuses on how to best assist marginalized and underrepresented populations to have their voices heard.

Cindy Dubuque-Gallo, LMSW, MAT, is a doctoral student in social work at UCONN and works for the Nancy A. Humphreys School for Political Social Work. Cindy’s research focuses on food justice and the National School Lunch Program.

Madeline and Cindy are both members of the national planning team of Voting Is Social Work. Their colleagues on the leadership team are Terry Mizrahi, Co-Chair; Mimi Abramovitz, Co-Chair; Beth Lewis, Tanya Rhodes Smith, Gena Gunn McClendon, and Deborah Mullin. http://www.votingissocialwork.org 

The authors would like to acknowledge Terry Mizrahi, Mimi Abramovitz, and Tanya Rhodes Smith for their thoughtful suggestions during the revision process for this article.