Republicans
dispute these laws represent a political agenda but the facts prove otherwise.
The far right has been talking about curbing voter rights since at least 1980 when
the influential conservative activist, Paul Weyrick told a gathering of
evangelical leaders he didn’t want everybody to vote. Weyrick said “As a matter
of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting
populace goes down." And that’s exactly true.
Efforts
to suppress voters’ rights kicked into high gear after the 2010 midterm
elections when the American Legislative Exchange Council, funded in part by the
Koch Family Foundation, began to steamroll legislation specifically designed to
impede voters at every step of the electoral process in at least 38 states. Judith
Browne-Dianis is the co-director of the Advancement Project, a civil rights
organization based in Washington that monitors attacks on voters’ rights. She calls
these laws the “most significant setback to voting rights in this country in a
century."
Kansas and Alabama now require
would-be voters to provide proof of citizenship before registering. Florida and
Texas made it harder for groups like the League of Women Voters to register new
voters. Five states, Florida, Georgia, Ohio, Tennessee and West Virginia,
shortened their early voting periods. Florida and Iowa barred ex-felons from
the polls, disenfranchising thousands of previously eligible voters. Six states
controlled by Republican governors and legislatures (Alabama, Kansas, South
Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin) require voters to produce a
government-issued ID before casting ballots. Maine tried, but fortunately
failed, to repeal Election Day voter registration. These laws have been
sprouting all over the nation. It certainly cannot be merely coincidental.
Republicans insist they’re waging war
against an epidemic of voter fraud, an irony lost on no one who still remembers
how they seized control of the White House in 2000 despite having lost the
popular vote. After taking power, the Bush administration declared war on voter
fraud, making it a "top priority" for federal prosecutors. In 2006,
the Justice Department fired two U.S. attorneys for refusing to pursue
trumped-up cases of fraud in New Mexico and Washington. Karl Rove called
illegal voting "an enormous and growing problem” and told the Republican
National Lawyers Association that parts of the country "are beginning to
look like we have elections like those run in countries where the guys in
charge are colonels in mirrored sunglasses." It was utter nonsense;
classic far wing hyperbolic dishonesty.
The
truth is something vastly different: a major probe by the Justice Department
between 2002 and 2007 failed to prosecute a single person for going to the
polls and impersonating an eligible voter, which the anti-fraud laws are
supposedly designed to stop. Out of 300 million votes cast in that period, only
86 people were convicted of other forms of voter fraud. That’s right: 86 out of
300 million. So it’s no wonder that the prestigious Brennan Center for Justice,
a leading advocate for voting rights at the New York University School of Law, offered
an excellent reality check in this sea of insanity when it announced that a
voter is more likely to be hit by lightning than impersonate another voter in
order to commit election fraud.
Nothing
about these laws makes any sense until
you begin to put all the pieces together. Also watch how aggressively Republicans
work to discredit any effort at pushback; that’s when they bring out the long
knives, whether Rush or the commentator whose snide article ridiculing Attorney
General Eric Holder’s efforts to protect voters’ rights was published in this
paper last week. It was a classic propaganda piece using flawed history, clever
sarcasm, and the usual false equivalencies to unrelated over-generalized facts
that people already show photo IDs
to cash checks, enter secure areas, and maybe buy beer -- clever but specious arguments
because none of those activities are Constitutional rights nor applied equally
around the country. Remember also that those particular ID requirements guard against legitimate harms: financial
crimes, safety, and underage drinking. Voter suppression laws are necessary only
if there’s an equally compelling need to protect the nation from the harm of
voter fraud -- but there is not.
The
laws themselves are the danger.
Or
put another way: there’s about as much voter fraud as there were weapons of
mass destruction.
______________This article was originally published 3/21/12 in my weekly column in the Journal Tribune. Here's the link:
http://www.journaltribune.com/articles/2012/03/21/columnist/doc4f69dd63d9d2a461096955.txt
No comments:
Post a Comment