The University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Leader Igniting Transformation (L.I.T.) debated critical issues of voting rights, election integrity and the role of social media in democracy at Witte Residence Hall on Thursday.
L.I.T. is an independent nonprofit political organization that focuses on mobilizing young Black and brown voters in Wisconsin.
Moderated by L.I.T. members Ashley, Jazzy and Jude, the event featured structured discussions where two teams of participants debated on important issues surrounding the upcoming presidential election.
Student members of L.I.T. were randomly divided into two teams who were given two minutes to present their argument, followed by a two-minute rebuttal and one-minute closing statements.
The first theme members discussed was voting rights and voter suppression, debating the question: “do voter ID laws strengthen or weaken democracy?”
Voter ID laws determine if someone needs to present an ID in order to vote, and if so, what type of ID, according to the official website of the U.S. government. Some states require a driver's license, state ID or passport, while others need a second form of identification such as a birth certificate or Social Security card.
Team one took the stance that voter ID laws strengthen our democracy, while team two argued that they weaken democracy.
The debate began with team one saying voter IDs are free and necessary for security and don’t infringe on constitutional rights.
“Voter ID laws can stop multiple types of fraud, such as impersonating another registered voter, preventing noncitizens from voting and stopping out-of-state residents or someone registered in multiple jurisdictions,” one member argued.
Team two argued that voter ID laws target marginalized and lower-income individuals and create barriers to voting.
“In Alabama, in 2011, they passed a voter ID law. But then in 2015, they closed 31 driver’s license offices,” a member of team two said. “They’re making it harder for people to get an ID, which is targeting lower-income people and African Americans.”
The second topic, election integrity and security, was prompted with the question: “do mail-in ballots increase election security?”
Team one argued that mail-in ballots increase voter accessibility and election security, whereas team two argued that mail-in ballots have logistical issues.
Speakers from team one argued that mail-in ballots increase accessibility for people who are homebound, disabled or who live far away from a polling station.
The team also argued that mail-in ballots increase security.
“You have to go through a strict process in order to get a mail-in ballot. I submitted a mail-in ballot, and they had to accept my form of ID and needed a witness to sign it,” one member said.
Team two brought up the risks of damage or loss of ballots during transit but acknowledged that these instances are rare.
“While it might be statistically insignificant, we would want everyone to have a proper opportunity to vote if they choose the mail-in option,” said a member of team two.
The last theme discussed was the role of social media in elections.
Team one argued social media helps democracy by increasing voter engagement and awareness.
One member said social media strengthens democracy by both providing access to information and monitoring false content. They explained that social media allows people to have conversations, unlike traditional TV networks where only speeches and interviews from politicians are shown.
“On TV, during a debate or interview people can say whatever they want,” said one of the members. “On X, which was formerly Twitter, I saw a tweet that made an incorrect political claim and at the bottom, it had a warning that it contained false content.”
Another member of the team said social media further helps democracy by giving people the freedom to choose their information sources.
Team two began by criticizing X, saying Elon Musk’s control over the app promotes his political posts more than others, leading to a biased news cycle.
“You just give one person a megaphone to spread misinformation,” one speaker said.
Another member of team two argued that the algorithms on social media cater to users’ interests, creating echo chambers that limit diverse perspectives.
“Algorithms are built off of what you want to see,” they said. “People get bombarded by what they want to see and what caters to their beliefs.”
With the presidential election on the horizon, the active involvement of students in such dialogues will be crucial for shaping the electoral landscape in Wisconsin.
“I’m really, really impressed with what everyone had to say,” said Ashley, one of the debate moderators. “That was an amazing debate.”
