DOJ Objects To Texas Voter ID Law; Says It Would Have Unfair Impact On Hispanics
Source: Talking Points Memo
The federal government will not preclear a photo voter identification law signed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) because it would have a greater impact on Hispanic voters, a Justice Department official said in a letter to state authorities on Monday.
Hispanic registered voters in Texas were either 46.5 percent or 120 percent more likely than average voter to lack a form of photo ID, according to data the state submitted to DOJ. The first data set was sent in September and the second in January, though Texas has refused to tell federal authorities which they believe is more accurate. The first data set said that 6.3 percent of Hispanic registered voters lacked photo ID compared to 4.3 percent of the general pool of registered voters, while the second data set said 10.8 percent of Hispanic registered voters lacked ID compared to 4.9 percent of registered voters.
In conclusion, the state has not met its burden of proving that, when compared to the benchmark, the proposed requirement will not have a retrogressive effect, or that any specific features of the proposed law will prevent or mitigate that retrogression, DOJ Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez wrote in a letter to state authorities. Additionally, the state has failed to demonstrate why it could not meet its stated goals of ensuring electoral integrity and deterring ineligible voters from voting in a manner that would have avoided this retrogressive effect.
Perez also wrote that Texas has not provided an explanation for the disparate results. More significantly, it declined to offer an opinion on which of the two data sets is more accurate, he wrote.
Read more: http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/03/doj_objects_to_texas_voter_id_law_says_it_would_ha.php?ref=fpa
lunasun
(21,646 posts)DFW
(54,436 posts)What did DOJ THINK the TX ID law was made for? To make it difficult for members of the Bush family to vote?
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)What ya'll think the goppers are trying to do, huh? TOTAL voter suppression.
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)in a state that does not automatically come under review.
The strongest argument I have heard is not how hard it is for some people to get state IDs. It's the fact that the basically state owns and can revoke or take it away at any time. This is not a voting rights issue specifically because it can effect anyone.
The push for this is not going to stop until there is a test hopefully not in a presidential election. If it ever actually goes through someone needs to get their 5th DUI, lose their wallet on the way to vote, or have a serious problem with authority when they get caught speeding on the way to vote.
A woman who has been married 5 times in as many states loses her ID and all of her paperwork and has to replace it all within days of an election.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Forget voter ID's. This seems to bring up a bigger problem.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)Hispanic women don't drive. Their husbands do all the driving.
lunasun
(21,646 posts)what is the bigger problem??
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)I need ID to buy a 6 pack at the store, buy a can of spray paint at home depot, and pick up prescription medication, to name just a few.
lunasun
(21,646 posts)In some states it has been thought to be targeting poor African American voters in particular
but TX has more Hispanics 35+ % vs 5 or less % for African American
so looks like this is the vote that ID law was gleaned for in TX
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)buy spray paint, buy wine, and drive legally then we need to address that.
lunasun
(21,646 posts)but they cost $$ many of the poor or youth do not have
I never needed an ID to get prescription meds for elderly but they had me drive to pick them up for them because...................they do not have a car anymore so no need for a driver's card either.
(thus the kind of photo ID that would meet the voter law).
18 year olds can vote but not drink wine in most states but that is not an issue currently
it is that they should be allowed to vote if properly registered already
I think you are confused with people who are trying to vote and are not already registered and approved to vote
These are registered voters they are trying to suppress eom
pbrower2a
(132 posts)One ordinarily must sign a name on a voter registration and then sign for the ballot. Matching signatures have ordinarily been the legal standard for determining that a forgery (and voter fraud would certainly require the crime of forgery) exists. An ID should be required in the event of a question of the validity of a signature, but then alone. In view of the penalties for voter fraud, the offense of impersonating a fellow voter is just not worth it.
Voting is a basic right in America. Buying booze, spray paint, or R-rated movies isn't. Having to sign for prescription medicines is one way to make sure that the right person gets the prescription.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)csziggy
(34,137 posts)But if you are in poverty, you may not be able to afford beer or to go to a doctor for treatments that require prescription medication. And spray paint is simply a luxury.
I've know people who went through life on the edges of society with no ID. They just did without anything that they had to provide ID to get. They didn't drive, didn't own any vehicles, didn't drink alcohol unless someone gave them some, couldn't afford to go to a doctor or the medicines a doctor might prescribe. They also could not get a job, welfare or public assistance, and could not get a place to live on their own. They lived off what they could scrounge - panhandling, picking up change at drive through windows, working odd jobs for cash.
And every one of them had no hope of ever voting, and they lived short, miserable lives. The last one I knew died of an infection at the age of 43.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)An underclass without access to many goods and services due to no ID.
csziggy
(34,137 posts)You're just now figuring this out?
But the way voting rights have been determined in the past does not give the state the right to take away a citizen's right to vote because they are part of an underclass.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)But everyone should be able to get a prescription.
csziggy
(34,137 posts)Than because they don't have ID.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I don't think that's covered in the story. And, as that seems to be, at best, tangential to the OP, maybe some research on your part and let us know what you find out and from what sources in a new thread...?
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)But if we have one group that cannot get prescription meds, buy spray paint, buy wine, drive legally, etc. then that seems like a very important issue.
DontPanic42
(3 posts)I'm in the process of getting my driver's license right now. Had to pay $78 earlier today for some mandatory driver's education we have to do if we are 17-25 years old, and once I'm done with this I have to go and pay the regular fees (around $36)for the other part of the exam. I think most people would rather just not pay the $100+ I know I didn't want to. I was fine taking the bus/carpooling everyday.
I know plenty of other Hispanics my age who are just choosing to wait until they turn 25 so they don't have to pay for the education course.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)money.
Kingofalldems
(38,469 posts)Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Do not think that is partisan.
Kingofalldems
(38,469 posts)Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)as a problem. Then spoke of what that problem entails.
.99center
(1,237 posts)And it is partisan to visit a liberal forum and try to throw every topic off subject.
Kingofalldems
(38,469 posts)Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Spray is just on my mind because I bought two cans the other day. And before you ask, I am not Banksy.
Kingofalldems
(38,469 posts)Don't know who Banksy is. Been here before?
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)DontPanic42
(3 posts)and apart from tylenol (which I can get from others) I haven't had to go out an get any kind of medicine. Haven't been to the doctor in about 5 years either. It's not impossible to live by without a license.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)I'm jealous that you do not need a car.
DontPanic42
(3 posts)very close. Not only do most of us have family all over the place that can help out, but I can probably make a post on facebook/email someone about needing a ride and I'll get it. Plus there's always the bus.
I do need a car now though. That's why I gave in and I'm trying to get my license. Unfortunately, a car wont magically appear once I get that license, but it's a start. I can at least borrow my parent's truck in the meantime.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)eyewall
(674 posts)Ms Palin says "Why are we allowing our country to move backwards?", as the right is moving our country backwards.
Most legal Hispanics I know don't like going out in a climate like this, or confronting this type of racism directly. This law is extremely effective at voter suppression.
UTUSN
(70,725 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)to determine. How do you know someone is hispanic. It is not a bit of data on voter
records.
So, the state had to just search the rolls for "hispanic sounding"
names - which is totally a shot in the dark. Then match that against
the motor vehicle files to see if there was a hit.
I am glad DOJ dismissed it....but I do understand why it was difficult to give the DOJ
the information it wanted.
This thing is not over. According to an email I just received from the county Democratic
Party:
"With the rejection, it now appears that the matter will go before a three-judge panel in Washington. That panel holds a status conference on Wednesday to discuss how to proceed with the case. State Rep. Marc Veasey and other minority voters also have asked to intervene in the case."
spin
(17,493 posts)I will admit that I have not thought through this issue or researched it.
I can see how this might present problems if a birth certificate was a requirement to get such an ID or even proof of residence if a person was homeless. However a citizen from a different nation should have adequate ID to acquire such an ID and a homeless person who is a citizen should have some record.
However with modern technology, it should be possible to manufacture a photo ID that could only be used once during an election cycle. Every citizen should be allowed the right to vote once. My idea would be similar to a gift card from a store but could be used only one time during an election cycle.
In order to have a fair election system, we do need to prevent abuse. In some cases such abuses might benefit Democrats but it is also possible that Republicans might abuse the system in other elections. One citizen, one vote. Is this unreasonable?
My wish is to see honest and fair elections in our nation. I have to state that I have a considerable amount of concern about computerized voting as this may well be able to be hacked by experts and might prove undetectable.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)LOL.
Blaze Diem
(3,384 posts)regardless of their national origin.
Namely Dem or liberal thinking.