
By Larry
Elder, Jul. 19, 2012
hoto
voter ID laws, according to Attorney General Eric Holder, are a "poll
tax." "Many of those without IDs," Holder recently told the
NAACP, "would have to travel great distances to get them -- and some would
struggle to pay for the documents they might need to obtain them."
Photo
voter ID opponent Keesha Gaskins, senior counsel in the Brennan Center's
Democracy Program, writes: "While these laws are allegedly passed to
secure elections, they impact communities of color in ways only reflected in
our Jim Crow past. Looking at voter ID laws alone, we know that although 11
percent of Americans lack government-issued photo ID, 25 percent of
African-Americans, 16 percent of Hispanics and 18 percent of elderly voters do
not have this form of ID. ... Hopefully our country will never again see the
kind of internal bloodshed we saw during the Civil War -- but we are now seeing
a war on voting that can only be compared to the dark, discriminatory past of
the Jim Crow era."
Does
the race disparate impact argument apply, for example, to the push for
Washington, D.C., statehood? After all, a majority black city is likely to
elect two liberal senators. What about the push to restore voting rights to
convicted felons? Given that ex-felons are not likely to vote a straight
Republican ticket, a cynic might say what drives the effort is the likelihood
of a batch of new Democratic voters. What about amnesty for illegal aliens? Is
the motive to bring "out of the shadows" millions of new Hispanic
Democratic voters?
A
"war on voting"?
Eleven
states have voter photo ID laws, including Pennsylvania, Indiana, Michigan,
South Dakota and Kansas. Five more states may require photo voter ID by
November, pending approval of their new laws by courts or the Department of
Justice. And 16 states require voters to present one of several various forms
of ID that do not necessarily have photos, such as a birth certificate.
Voter
ID laws are popular.
Nationwide,
whites, Hispanics and blacks support them. MIT and Harvard Professor Stephen
Ansolabehere studies the impact of voter ID laws. Pointing to a 2006 nationwide
survey of 36,500 voters, conducted under a collaborative project by 37
universities, Ansolabehere writes: "Perhaps the most surprising
demographic or political comparison arose with race. And the surprise was the
lack of division. Over 70 percent of whites (77 percent), Hispanics (78
percent) and blacks (70 percent) support the requirement. Black and Hispanic
voters did not express measurably less support for voter identification
requirements than whites."
Voter
ID laws are legal.
The
Supreme Court, in a case over Indiana's voter ID law -- one of the nation's
most stringent -- upheld the voter requirements 6-3. Justice John Paul Stevens,
then the court's most liberal member, wrote the majority opinion: "The
State has a valid interest in participating in a nationwide effort to improve
and modernize election procedures that have been criticized as antiquated and
inefficient."
Critics
call photo voter ID a solution in search of a problem. What proof, they ask,
demonstrates a problem with the integrity of voting? Popular political
scientist Larry Sabato, author of the book on voter fraud called "Dirty
Little Secrets," writes: "From voter fraud to election chicanery of
all kinds, America teeters on the edge of scandal every November. The fact that
so many people want to thwart legitimate and prudent efforts to improve ballot
integrity has become a scandal in its own right."
How
easy is it to commit voter fraud?
James
O'Keefe, the conservative activist who caught ACORN workers on tape giving
illegal advice, released video of a young bearded white man walking into the
polling place of Attorney General Eric Holder on Election Day.
Young
white man: Do you have an Eric Holder? (He gives an address.)
Poll
worker: I do. (He repeats the address.) OK. Please sign your name there
(pointing to the signature line in his huge book of precinct voter
registrations).
Young
white man: I actually forgot my ID.
Poll
worker: You don't need it. It's all right.
Young
white man: I left it in the car.
Poll
worker: As long as you're in here (pointing to his voter registration book),
you're on our list, and that's who you say you are, you're OK.
Young
white man: I would feel more comfortable if I just had my ID. Is it all right
if I go get it?
Poll
worker: Sure, go back.
Young
white man: I'll be back 'faster' than you can say 'furious.'
Poll
worker: We're not going anywhere.
Young
white man: All right, thank you. (He leaves, never actually taking Eric
Holder's ballot.)
It was
that easy.
Poor
minority voters without government-issued ID, voter ID opponents effectively
tell us, are simply too stupid to figure out how to get it. Indiana, for
example, offers convenient ways of obtaining ID. If campaign workers can mount
get-out-the-vote efforts, including picking up voters on Election Day and
driving them to the voting precinct, why not put the same energy into helping
Granny obtain ID?
"LIke" Larry Elder on Facebook
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comment Policy:
The author of this blog will attempt to engage in conversation via the comments section whenever possible and recognize the 24/7 nature of the internet. Moderating and posting of comments will occur during regular operational hours Monday through Friday. Comments submitted after hours or on weekends will be read and posted as early as possible, however admins and/or the author is unable to commit to replying to every comment posted.
This is a moderated blog. That means all comments will be reviewed before posting. In addition, it is expected that participants will treat each other, as well as the author and admin, with respect. Comments that contain vulgar or abusive language; personal attacks of any kind will not be posted. Comments that are spam or that promote services or products will not be posted. It is requested that all comments remain on topic.
The Elder Statement blog does not guarantee or warrant that any information posted by individuals on this blog is correct, and disclaims any liability for any loss or damage resulting from reliance on any such information. The Elder Statement blog may not be able to verify, does not warrant or guarantee, and assumes no liability for anything posted on this website by any other person. The Elder Statement blog does not endorse, support or otherwise promote any private or commercial entity or the information, products or services contained on those Web sites that may be reached through links on our Web site.
To protect individual privacy and the privacy of others, please do not include phone numbers, addresses or email details in the body of a comment. Such information will result in removal of a comment.
Thank you for your attention.
The Elder Statement