General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsVoter suppression just had a bad night in Texas
by Ian Millhiser at Think Progress
https://thinkprogress.org/texas-voter-id-low-energy-sad-54a84e6928c4
"SNIP................
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) signed a law last night which significantly rolls back the states efforts to make it harder to cast a ballot. Though the states new voter ID law is not a total victory for supporters of voting rights, it is a major shift in the states law brought about by the fact that the state repeatedly lost its efforts to defend its previous law in court.
All voter ID laws are, to some extent, voter suppression laws. They make it harder to vote, while addressing a problem voter impersonation fraud at the polls that is virtually non-existent. Twenty million Texas votes were cast in the ten year period before the state enacted its voter ID law in 2011, but only two people were convicted of the kind of fraud that is supposedly targeted by such a law.
Indeed, Texas 2011 voter ID law doesnt even try very hard to pretend that it exists for some purpose other than keeping certain people from casting a ballot. The law permitted voters to cast a ballot if they showed a gun permit (something Republicans are more likely to carry than Democrats), but it didnt allow someone to vote with a student ID (students are especially likely to favor Democrats). A federal court also found that the law was passed, at least in part, with a discriminatory intent in violation of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
That law, however, has now been significantly watered down.
After a conservative federal appeals court rejected Texass 2011 law, Texas agreed to be bound by a court order limiting its ability to enforce the law during the 2016 election. Under that court order, registered voters who present a valid voter registration certificate, a certified birth certificate, a current utility bill, a bank statement, a government check, a paycheck, or any other government document that displays the voters name and address may cast a regular ballot if they sign a reasonable impediment declaration a document stating that the voter was not reasonably able to obtain the forms of ID mandated by the 2011 law.
...................SNIP"
MagickMuffin
(15,944 posts)I think Julian would win in a landslide. Believe me!!!
progree
(10,909 posts)/---- Begin excerpt--------------------------------------
Critics contend that the measure, passed by the Republican-controlled legislature last month and signed on Thursday by Abbott, a first-term Republican, is still aimed at discouraging racial and ethnic minorities, who tend to favor Democrats. They particularly object to provisions carrying a prison sentence of up to 10 years for lying on a voter-ID affidavit.
----- End excerpt ---------------------------------------
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-texas-voters-idUSKBN18U00A?il=0
dalton99a
(81,532 posts)The bill actually states "An election officer may not question the reasonableness of an impediment," and it looks like they're keeping a form that is already in use:
progree
(10,909 posts)in the law, and none of them mentioned this escape language.
One heck of a lot of people reading / following the news probably would not even ask for the affidavit to see this language. And even then I would suspect some kind gamesmanship like wondering if "reasonableness" is one thing, and "lying" is something else. And being Texas, and wasn't there someone who got 8 years for voting illegally recently in the news? After all, the form itself is contradictory. "don't perjure yourself but noone is going to question the reasonableness"
http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2017/02/09/grand-prairie-woman-sentenced-to-8-years-in-prison-for-voter-fraud/
Scare tactics is one of the weapons the right-wingers deploy to great effect in scaring people from voting.
I know some of us (including me) have difficulty understanding why someone might be kind of iffy about voting just because they think it doesn't make much difference to anything whether they vote or not (I know people like this) unless they are galvanized by some rock star candidate, and then adding fear of 8 years is enough to make them decide naw...
Then some people basically just won't lie on a government form, certainly not when the downside looks a lot bigger than the rather limited upside (after all, "2.8 million more votes for Hillary didn't count" ... and yes one can explain the electoral college and that it is a state-by-state election and it is in the Constitution since the beginning until one is blue in the face, and it's just not going to make a damn bit of difference convincing them that 2.8 million voters didn't matter).