The
new Texas Voter ID law had one effect with which neither side can
quibble. It got Fort Worth in the national news for something besides
our mind-numbingly long summers, our sometimes-killer tornadoes, or
being forever and famously known as the place where former-Baptist
Sunday School teacher Willie Nelson lit up his first of countless
joints.
Before
the November 5th election, Fort Worth was ground zero for
Voter ID law news. Gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis' signing of an
affidavit when she voted early and former Speaker of the House Jim
Wright's problems getting a state-issued personal identification card
both made national news.
Besides
getting Fort Worth in the news, the above stories are illustrative of
the consequences of Texas' new voter ID law that was concocted in the
same ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) mad science
laboratories that gave us those brilliant stand your ground laws.
The
law's supporters argue that requiring ID ensures the integrity of
elections by stopping voter fraud, but according to the Brennan
Center for Justice, a non-partisan public policy and law institute,
“photo ID laws are effective only in preventing individuals
from impersonating other voters at the polls — an occurrence more
rare than getting struck by lightning.”
If
the state legislature had to follow truth-in-packaging laws, the
Voter ID law would be rightly named “The Let's Keep Texas Red a Few
More Years Law,” since its real raison d'être is to hold
back the inevitable demographic change in Texas as long as possible
and keep Texas from turning purple or, bite your tongue, blue.
In
an op-ed written last year, Attorney General Abbott voiced the
frequent Republican talking point, “Opponents of voter ID” are
“unable to produce a single Texan who would be unable to vote
because of the voter ID law.” While it's difficult to figure out an
unknown, namely, those who didn't show up at the polls, it's not
impossible.
As
statistician and uber-nerd Nate Silver has pointed out on his
FiveThirtyEight blog, “The stricter laws, like those that require
photo identification, seem to decrease turnout by about 2 percent as
a share of the registered voter population.”
And
according to the League of Women Voter of Texas President Linda
Krefting, “anywhere from 500,000 to 800,000 voters” would “not
be able to present the proper identification. The concern we have is
that all this flap in the news” about the voter ID law “may”
end up “discourag[ing] people from turning out at the polls.”
Though
while the law affects Democrats more than Republicans, since
minorities and the poor, more likely Democratic voters, are
disproportionately less likely to have the necessary ID, it also
suppresses some likely Republican votes, as well. If former Speaker
Jim Wright was not a lifelong Democrat, his demographic – an
elderly white male living in Tarrant County – trust me, absolutely
screams Republican voter.
That
obvious fact was lost on some hereabouts who accused Speaker Wright
of faking his problems getting proper ID for the election
identification certificate or EIC. These conspiracy theorists are
undoubtedly unschooled in the EIC's rather stringent requirements.
Texas Observer columnist Cindy Casares joked that “the list
of documentation needed for an EIC is less complicated than the tax
code but not by much.”
First
you have to prove you're a US citizen, then you have to prove your
identity by toting a grab bag of ID's, and of course, if your name on
any these documents doesn't exactly match, you have to bring your
marriage license, court order, or a divorce decree. I don't know
about you, but having been married for 28 years, I couldn't put my
hands on my marriage license if my life depended on it.
And
while the certificate is free, all that documentation isn't and can
cost beaucoups of time, too. A certified copy of your birth
certificate runs you $23 in Harris County, while marriage licenses
or divorce decrees will run you $20 each. Plus, the EIC's are
available at DPS offices in only thirteen of 254 counties in our
sprawling state. Little wonder that The New York Times
reported that “by Election Day, only 121 voter identification
documents had been issued statewide” in a state with 26 million
people.
But
to top it off, here in the Fort the law's implementation wasn't quite
ready for prime-time. One election judge in a precinct near downtown,
trying to school me on the ins and outs of the law, while he was
attempting to finish his KFC take-out lunch, told me that if a voter
showed up with an ID with a name that was “substantially similar”
to what appeared on the voting rolls but the addresses were the same
on both the ID and the registration card, he could decide whether to
have him initial on the affidavit. WRONG!
The
next day Tarrant County Election Administrator Steve Raborn confirmed
that the judge was in error. The similar addresses have nothing to do
with whether to initial the affidavit. And it is not up to the judge
to decide. If the names are similar, the voter still needs to initial
to affirm his or her identity. PERIOD.
When
I went to vote at my regular polling place, a Knights of Columbus
Hall, my driver's license read Kenneth Pardue, but my voter
registration card had me as Kenneth Wheatcroft-Pardue, sort of a
textbook example of someone with “substantially similar” names
who needed to initial the affidavit.
But inexplicably, I wasn't asked to initial anything,
even when the Election Judge showed me a paper copy of the PowerPoint
that Raborn had used to train them which showed as clear as day that
voters with “substantially similar” names needed to initial the
affidavits.
My
own admittedly unscientific checking of polling places near where I
live found a range of 0 to 2% initialing the affidavits. For
comparison, it was reported that in San Antonio one-third of voters
had to initial the affidavits and in Fort Bend County 40%.
Now
while I oppose the ID law, its half-ass and inconsistent
implementation just shows how unserious we are about elections and
voting in this country. Instead of this patchwork system plagued by
partisan politics and incompetence we should take elections out of
the hands of partisan legislators and make it professional, modern,
and non-partisan.
But
regardless of the Keystone Kops implementation of the law, the real
question is this: does Texas which ranks last or close to last in
voter participation really need more impediments to voting? As the
Brennan Center study pointed out, “The voter fraud phantom . . .
disenfranchises actual legitimate
voters, without a corresponding actual benefit.”
Little
wonder that the Department of Justice is challenging this law. When
the state allows a voter to use a concealed handgun permit but
doesn't allow university ID, it's obvious to any impartial observer
that this game is rigged and who it's rigged in favor of.
One-not-so-famous
citizen hereabouts, Kendall McCook, made a splash in the local news
by tearing up his voter registration card in protest of the law, and
promising not to vote again until the law was repealed. Who knows,
maybe more citizens will get fed up and tear up their voter
registration card a la Kendall McCook? Stranger things have
been known to happen hereabouts. Just ask Willie.
No comments:
Post a Comment