All Voters are Unequal: Voter ID Law Exposed as Unfair, States Still Follow Suit

by: project vote

Sat Oct 03, 2009 at 00:00


When an appellate court shut down Indiana's unequal mandate for polling-place voter ID, it sent a clear signal that-partisan politics aside-election laws should be assessed on whether or not all voters are given equal access to the democratic process. Yet, despite violations of law and the fact that absentee voting is more susceptible to voter fraud activity than in-person voting, other states continue to emulate what was one of the country's toughest voter ID laws.

project vote :: All Voters are Unequal: Voter ID Law Exposed as Unfair, States Still Follow Suit


While it has long been held (and proven) by voting rights advocates that voter ID is harmful to voters that do not have or cannot obtain required ID (primarily young, low income, and minority voters), the Indiana court's recent decision was based on entirely different criteria. The case was brought on the argument that "Indiana's Constitution requires all voters to be treated uniformly, and that the ID law treats absentee voters and in-person voters differently," wrote Sheila Kennedy, a professor of law and public policy at the Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs in an Indianapolis Star opinion editorial Monday.


"The court unanimously agreed. If the legislature wants to keep the law, in other words, it'll have to apply it to all voters, not just those who show up in person."

However, "partisan politics" shroud the very simple argument that all voters should have the law applied fairly as voter ID supporters scramble to keep the voter ID battle afloat.

In response to Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniel's declaration that the judges' decision was "preposterous...partisan politics," Kennedy wrote that his "rhetoric is unfortunate on a number of levels. It betrays unfamiliarity with the arguments involved, and -- worse -- paints judges as no more than partisans in robes. Such attacks, as the Indiana Bar Association pointed out, undermine the legitimacy of the judicial system."

"In other words," she wrote, "the judges weren't the ones playing politics."

This year, 25 states introduced variations of Indiana's law in their own legislatures. Many failed to see the light of day, but battles are expected in at least five states next year, including Oklahoma, Kansas, Minnesota, Tennessee, and Mississippi.


Mississippi has battled voter ID in the state legislature for years and-in an attempt to circumvent the legislature in 2010-had plans to put an initiative on the state ballot for voters to decide. However, last week, Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann announced that a Republican sponsored voter ID referendum would not be on the ballot until November 2011 due to complications with state law regarding signature gathering, according to the Associated Press. Hosemann's office collected almost 19,000 signatures while the state Republican Party has 40,000. Ninety thousand signatures are required to put the voter ID initiative on the ballot.

The postponement of the referendum is raising suspicions among some. "With statewide elections coming in 2011, GOP officials may be counting on a voter ID referendum to help boost its turnout," a Mississippi publication, the Greenwood Commonwealth editorialized Monday. "There is arguably a lot more at stake for the party in 2011 than the congressional elections in 2010.

"That said, the delay could serve a useful purpose if it focuses the public's attention and that of lawmakers on where the problem of voter fraud really lies - absentee balloting."


 


 


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Dear Alabama: (4.00 / 1)
Both of your Senators are snakes. They're no better or worse than any of the others. But they're snakes.

Shame on you, Alabamians for electing them. Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby are both snakes. You elected them. Shame on you voters in Alabama. How could you?


But did Alabama really elect them? (0.00 / 0)
Remember: it's not just who gets to vote or not, but also who counts the votes that decides elections.  Making it illegal for poor people,especially Black and other minority populations, to vote is just one part of the process in vote fraud (distinguishable in name from voter fraud by the missing 'r').  The other part, which perhaps has as much if not more impact than deciding who gets to vote or not, is in the ballot-counting process.  If your political party is in charge and the bosses decide certain votes won't be counted, then who's going to stop you from declaring your guy the winner in a close election even though he lost?  That's exactly what happened in 2000 and 2004, and to no avail in 2006 and 2008 as higher voter turnout and disgust with Republican policies finally overcame the GOP system of vote fraud.



[ Parent ]
Voter fraud? (4.00 / 2)
The biggest issues of voter fraud come in disenfranchising voiers by erecting barriers to voting. Period.

The second biggest problem is in counting the votes.  In Florida in 2000 for example, half of the uncounted ballots belonged to blacks vs. about 16% of the voters.  In New Mexico in 2004, native Americans had a hugely disproportionate number of votes uncounted.  Something like 8 times the percentage as for whites IIRC.


The biggest problem is really (0.00 / 0)
CORPORATE OWNED & CONTROLLED, ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES, which are all subject to tampering by source code!!!!!!!!

[ Parent ]
Equal Rights -- A Poor Foundation for Suffrage (0.00 / 0)
The right to vote has been contested, often violently, since the earliest days of the republic:

The generally minority parties: Federalists, Whigs, including self-styled conservatives, liberals, and even, at times, some progressives in both name parties have long favored a property-qualified franchise.

Today, a grab-bag of christianists, radicals, and neo-liberals deploy sophistical and legalistic arguments or just quietly maintain systematic, statutory, administrative, and technical means of subverting universal suffrage with economic discrimination.

That falls most heavily on the young, minorities, and obviously, the poor. Failing those high-tone props, there are also scare-tactics and "politics as war", euphemized as "dirty-tricks", to fall back on. Most recently the latter have come to include schemes to integrate voter registration into military and police intelligence "fusion centers".

The majority party of perpetual incumbents with "safe" or "cheap" seats, the professional or life-time office-seekers -- term-limited or not -- and their entourage of personal staff in government and mercenary consultants on permanent campaign -- politicos where partisans should be -- focus on "likely voters" today. They use a mix of auctions and patronage, rather than primary elections and conventions to select candidates and delegates with as little competition -- other than for money -- as possible.

This non-partisan party of bi-partisan concession-tenders has reduced governance to collusive bargaining. They seek to maximize monopoly rent, exploit indirect taxation, substitute regressive for progressive taxation, coddle the merely rich, and, to the extent necessary for all of that, disenfranchise, subject to surveillance or judicial supervision, and, failing those, incarcerate the young, minorities, and obviously, the poor on a Soviet scale but with modern amenities.

The conspicuous, but now almost trivial, exception to this subversion of republican democracy, specifically of responsible, two-party government, is and has been the raising and de-mobilization of armies, comprised of the young, obviously, specifically of minorities, including immigrants, but exempting the non-poor. The inherent impracticality of this in wartime has ratcheted up political participation from time to time on a civil rights theory, but not pervasively or permanently.

Besides the cost of supporting both federal regular and state militia forces, the fundamental link between institutions of "manhood" suffrage and militia formation was broken from the outset due to the existence and persistence of black slavery. By the start of the Civil War, Confederate militia were voluntary as to taxation and participation. While romanticized and over-decorated, they were underfed and inadequate to the task, so conscription was hastily introduced for the first time in American history. By the end of the war the draft was pervasive on both sides. But, only the Union raised and armed black regulars and militia.

Even then, with the advent of local and national bi-partisan agreements to end Reconstruction, black militia were dismantled or integrated into the regular army where they could be posted abroad, on mlitary reservations, or in western territories where they could not vote. Such was and still is the fragility of civil rights in an Anglo-American political-economic system, where there is and never has been a "well regulated militia" along Roman, Swiss, or European lines.

What we have is a constitutional right of suffrage at the state level which is tied to no military obligation or national institution whatsoever. Instead, the franchise is administered, in Texas for instance, by state licensing and county tax collection agencies, along the very same means as literacy tests and poll taxes previously, with no more than the glossy show of civil rights legalism and condescension.

What is missing here are the patriotic and egalitarian foundations of suffrage -- civic rights and rituals that are traditionally and functionally coupled with military obligations, rites, and arms, namely seals and ciphers.

The GOP has a coherent position -- a property-qualified franchise resting on top of an "all volunteer" military and an feudal rights of "gun ownership".

Democrats have no position at all: Self-congratulation over condescending administration of civil rights and statutory entitlements funded with borrowed money along with complicity in regressive taxation to support an emerging police-state and bloated defense budget. We have squared the circle with an ideology of elite pacifism, vicarious militarism for the middle-class, and secret burials for the working class.

This only works when and where Democrats govern in coalition with the GOP. It was never morally sustainable, but now it is clap-trap and just plain broken, in Texas for sure.



::JRBehrman


Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.


blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search