Voter ID and Matt Schultz’ Name Recognition



Recently The Des Moines Register’s Jennifer Jacobs tried to diminish Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz’s push for a voter ID law in Iowa by bringing up his name ID.  She wrote, “Despite his big push to require Iowans to show a photo ID to vote, Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz just doesn’t have name ID.  Fifty percent of Iowans don’t know enough about him to rate his job approval.”

This begs the question why are they even polling on Matt Schultz’ name ID and job approval less than two years into his first term?  What down ballot statewide employee would have more than a 50% name ID?  It would be great to think that 100% of Iowans polled paid enough attention to our government to be able to rate an official like Schultz or say State Treasurer Michael Fitzgerald, but we just don’t have an informed electorate like that.  Jacobs notes that the other 50% who did know him well enough to rate him  40% approve of the job he is doing, and only 10% disapprove.

Craig Robinson made the following point about Schutlz’ name ID with a recent poll he commissioned that shows 68% of Iowans want a voter ID law.

The TIR/VCR poll showed that 47 percent of Iowans were unaware of Congressman Bruce Braley.  Thirty-Seven percent of Iowans were not aware of Lt. Governor Kim Reynolds.  Even 24 percent of Iowans were unaware of Congressman Steve King.    Schultz’s name ID is meaningless, but his push for an Iowa voter I.D. law is not.

Also when you consider of the 50% who do know Schultz he carries an 80% approval rating.  That is remarkable, and it would be fair to presume that is a result of his push for a voter ID, the primary issue he campaigned on, and the fact he’s trying to curb voter fraud which despite what Democrats and The Des Moines Register may claim does exist in Iowa.  Iowans want a voter ID law that is clear and it has bipartisan support (90% of Republicans, 70% of Independents and 43% of Democrats). How many people know or don’t know Matt Schultz really is irrelevant to that discussion.