Every Sunday, right before we receive Holy Communion, I pray the Lord’s Prayer with my church. In general, I think it’s hard to pray in a humble and honest way during an antagonistic election season like this one, but this prayer Jesus taught to his disciples gives me the words and continually teaches me to pray.

We say together in the fourth petition: “Give us today our daily bread.” I find this brief petition challenging and molding me as I prepare to vote this Tuesday. On my ballot in Minnesota this year, I will be faced with a constitutional amendment that would require all voters to have a valid ID in order to vote. In a deeply divided atmosphere, how can my faith help me navigate the responsibility of my decision on this amendment?

My Lutheran tradition has a particularly expansive understanding of what “daily bread” means. Daily bread includes: the house where you live, the food you eat, your friends and family, your job and income, the seat belt that protects you in your car, and a lot more. In short, everything in your daily life that helps you survive and flourish.

We don’t believe that receiving this daily bread is contingent on our prayer or that God only gives daily bread to believing Christians. Instead, as Martin Luther writes in his Small Catechism, “We ask in this prayer that God cause us to recognize what our daily bread is and to receive it with thanksgiving.” This prayer invites us into discernment on all the gifts of God that support and nourish us.

Praying for daily bread is also a prayer for our government and the common good. A just government brings the order, stability, and peace needed to produce and share the bread we eat. In our Large Catechism, Christians are encouraged to pray for their civil and governmental leaders when they pray for daily bread. The right to vote is included in daily bread for me. With our vote we can work to create a society that nourishes and protects life, and I believe God is at work in the order of our electoral system to give daily bread.

When I walk to my polling place on Tuesday morning, I hope this prayer will be with me to cause me to give gratitude to God and to remember the needs of my neighbors. After all, we are taught to pray not just for my daily bread, but for our daily bread.

Perhaps the most serious example of political breakdown in our country are the arguments over Voter ID laws. In Minnesota, this debate has made it onto our ballot. The greatest concern for me and others opposed to the amendment is that it would deny a large number of eligible voters their right to vote. Furthermore, the people who are least likely to have an ID are people with the greatest barriers to obtaining an ID in the future, such as people with a low income, a disability, or lack of transportation.

The League of Women Voters estimates that 15 percent of voters in Minnesota earning less than $35,000 a year do not have a photo ID. This amendment would create barriers for low-income people to affect our common life in the same year where the Citizens United Supreme Court case removed barriers for wealthy individuals to influence elections. The Center for Responsive Politics is predicting that $970 million in soft money will be spent this year on elections nationwide.

We are making it harder for the poor and easier for the rich at the same time. This growing imbalance questions the integrity of a core belief that holds our democracy together: that each of us has the same civic worth, that we each have equal power to elect our representatives through our vote, that when we don’t like something about our government we have the same ability as our neighbor to change it. This ideal of civic equality is part of the peaceful order that makes our daily bread possible.

Of course, we have often fallen short of this ideal, which wears heavily on our social fabric. Healing where we have been torn apart is also a part of my prayer: “Forgive us our sins.” The deeper issue underlying much of the divide over these laws is connected with the legacy and reality of racism in the United States and the long history of restricting the franchise. The ongoing discussion of the health of this democracy needs to listen profoundly to the voices of people of color who know from experience and from their historical memories about restrictions at the polls – from literacy tests to poll taxes.

Today, the impact of the proposed change to the constitution would again disproportionately affect people of color. For instance, 25 percent of African-Americans of voting age in Minnesota do not have current ID. Given our history and present realities, there needs to be a high burden of proof for the need for reform when proposing a new barrier to voting. I do not believe this level of evidence has been sufficiently met, and I do not believe there has been enough effort to name and recognize the diverse perspectives in this conversation. We all benefit from groups like Voices for Voting Rights who seek to address these deeper issues. I wonder as a Minnesota citizen and as a person of faith how we can grapple with this history in a way that brings honesty and healing to our political disagreements.

Fear and distrust of one’s neighbor have driven this issue. One side accuses the other of fraud; the other accuses the one of willfully suppressing voters. Regardless of how I vote, it should matter to me that a large percentage of citizens in my state believe this identification system is necessary, because they do not trust the process and are suspicous of their neighbors. How can I grow in my empathy with my fellow citizens even as I disagree with this ballot measure? How do we regain trust?

Disagreement in a pluralistic democracy is both inevitable and necessary, but our disagreement should take place in the context of a commitment to engage and empathize with the people with whom we disagree. George Herbert Mead said near the beginning of the 20th century, “Democracy depends upon the ability of the voter, once inside the voting booth, to vote for someone else’s interests in addition to their own.” Diverse people will find diverse ways to enter into this conversation to foster this empathy and commitment to one another. For me, I feel drawn into this empathy in our prayer for daily bread where we ask God to sustain the life of all people.

No matter the outcome of Minnesota’s vote on this amendment, there is work to be done to strengthen the social fabric that makes our democracy possible. It will be the work of listening and of daring to trust one another as we disagree. It will be the work of regaining faith in the equality and integrity of our electoral system. I believe my tradition can offer a rich understanding of the way the right to vote contributes to the survival and flourishing of us all. I hope God will cause my prayer and my vote to not only be for me, but also for you.

Photo by US-AID, 
U.S. Government, 
via
 Wikimedia Commons.