GOP wants to take NC back … all the way to 1876
Submitted by Jerimee on Tue, 12/28/2010 - 11:33am
Article written by Jerimee Richir and Kate Neely
As Republicans in South Carolina celebrated the 150th anniversary of the Confederacy over the holidays, the North Carolina GOP took a slightly more modern approach to rolling back civil rights. Well, if you consider 1876 modern. The NC GOP is pushing to reinstate one of the hallmarks of the Jim Crow laws: the poll tax.
Thinly veiled as a measure to prevent voter fraud, the voter ID is a poll tax by another name. GOP members of the incoming NC General Assembly are trumpeting the measure as their main legislative priority. This increase of government control is a complete reversal from the limited government platforms on which many North Carolina Republicans campaigned.
Certain tea-related groups and candidates attempted to distance themselves from displays of blatant racism during campaign season, constantly steering public discourse towards matters of big government. They were quick to claim that the election of our nation’s first non-white president had nothing to do with the rise of right-wing extremist groups. They, along with their media cronies, spun the story of patriotic dissent, not anger and terror caused by what they perceive as the dwindling control of whites in US politics and society.
There are many different policies the NCGA could focus on that are in keeping with the message of limited government: reducing corporate welfare, relaxing minimum sentencing regulations that choke our prison system and take power from county courts, or reducing government intrusions into the privacy and family life of citizens. If you believed the Tea Party’s spin during elections, you might even have anticipated such reforming measures.
In truth, however, there is no Tea Party. There is no commitment to ideals of limited government, and the goals of the GOP are the same as ever: to preserve the privileged status of old wealthy white men. In order to return to a time when white male landowners were still in charge, the GOP is intent on passing this Reconstruction-era legislation.
The GOP proposes to force voters to purchase a government identity card or face losing their right to vote. This is not because of any real threat—voter fraud allegations are rarely found to be true—but because discouraging working class American voters will give Republicans an advantage at the polls. This is especially important as districts across North Carolina increase in population, due in large part to growing communities of immigrants and African-Americans. Nothing strikes fear into the hearts of GOP leadership quite like empowered and enfranchised minorities.
A colleague explained the threat of voter ID like this:
“… It is true that voter ID seems innocuous at first, but it actually disenfranchises a lot of people and can amount to a poll tax when people are put in a position where they have to pay for the documents, or supporting documents, they need to obtain the voter id. Studies estimate that up to 10% of voters lack the forms of identification called for in bills like this - and those voters tend to be the historically disenfranchised voters (elderly, people of color, students, and poor people - in other words, not the people who vote for the legislators who support voter ID laws).
If legislators want to work on improving the integrity of our elections they ought to look to laws that prevent voter intimidation—like we've seen in too many elections in the recent past—and outlaw voter deception practices. There are plenty of documented cases of that.”
To Republican leaders, ten dollars and a wait at the DMV seems a trifling matter. To low-income voters in North Carolina, that is nearly twice the state minimum wage and almost an entire day spent travelling to and from the government office. Certainly these individuals value their right to vote, but they would rather be able to provide for their families and keep the jobs that are so difficult to come by.
GOP representatives are no doubt aware of the fallacy of voter fraud as a crime; under President Bush, the federal government spent hundreds of millions of dollars in an attempt to find examples of individuals voting illegally, but found less than 150 cases between 2002 and 2007. Almost all of these were the result of individuals mistakenly filling out registration forms or misunderstanding eligibility rules, not voter fraud. State legislatures across the country have received testimony from non-partisan organizations that voter IDs solve a problem that does not really exist. The purpose of the voter identification card is clear enough: to discourage North Carolinians from voting.
In spite of the awful historical precedents set by similar poll taxes during Jim Crow segregation, not a single conservative leader in North Carolina has stood up against the voter ID. This only serves to enhance the feeling that Republicans in our state are placing party loyalties above public interest. The results of doing so tore apart our nation centuries ago, but the implications remain today.
Frontpaged & still waiting on the fiscal note
Attention anybody at the General Assembly or on the state or local government beat:
This proposal will cost the state money to implement.
Such funds will be taken from the taxpayer pocket and increase budget deficits.
1) Where is the money?
2) More importantly, who is asking these questions?
It seems to be no one.
A solution in search of a problem
That's the essence of capitalism. Think teeth whiteners.
Do good. Be nice. Have fun.
What did the last filed voter ID bill state? (HB 430) 2009
Every individual seeking to vote in person shall present to a local election official at a voting place or one-stop (early voting) site before voting there one of the following:
(1) A current and valid photo identification.
(2) A copy of one of the following documents that shows the name and address of the voter: a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document.
The Right to Vote Provisionally. – If an individual is required under subsection (a),(b), or (b2) of this section to present identification in order to vote, but that individual does not present the required identification, that individual may vote a provisional official ballot. If the voter is at the voting place, the voter may vote provisionally there without unnecessary delay. If the voter is voting by mail-in absentee ballot, the mailed ballot without the required identification shall be treated as a provisional official ballot.
I really believe that if this is going to be discussed, then the actual bill should be read, not the hyperbole that is tossed around. You can still oppose voter ID for whatever reasons you want but at least drop the world is ending rhetoric.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
"A point in every direction is the same as no point at all" - Pointless Man
It's still a solution in search of a problem
There is no voter fraud problem. The sole purpose is to suppress voting among those who may not be aware of the identification requirements.
Two years ago, I had to make three separate trips to the automobile registration office because the papers I brought the first two times didn't satisfy their paperwork demands. If I hadn't needed a license I would have told them to go fuck themselves, and would certainly not have troubled myself with repeat visits.
That's exactly what will happen with whatever law the R's push through, the "actual bill" of course, doesn't yet exist.
To be clear, I don't see any "world is ending" rhetoric here. The concern is a simple one about a law being proposed to solve a problem that does not exist by creating a law that will have the immediate effect of suppressing voting.
Do good. Be nice. Have fun.
And let us not forget that there are other problems
Voter intimidation is one. Voter registration problems are another.
I was worried about Same Day Registration because of potential for computer problems. I was told these could not happen.
The first weekend after Early Voting started in October 2008, I found out that a Cary voter who had been registered at the same address for 30 years and who had verified his registration on the morning of October 16 had somehow been de-registered by noon that same day. They asked him for his name - and he gave it to them - but they said he wasn't on their voter registration list. They then looked him up by his address. They found his wife and son, but not him. They asked for his NCDP number and still couldn't fine him. They asked for his Voter Registration number, but he didn't know it (I don't have mine memorized) and he didn't have it on him. So they told him he could cast a provisional ballot but he said "screw that - I want to do SDR and get a new registration". So he did - but since he was voting at the Cary Town Center where poll greeters were not allowed, he had no one other than the Wake BOE to complain to.
I found out about it on Sunday, and I was able to look at the Wake BOE web voter registration database which was two weeks behind the SBOE. I found him and notified the Wake BOE. They fixed the problem with his registration - but then removed the Wake BOE voter registration database from the web. All we have left in Wake is the SBOE site. But Durham County has both their own county database as well as the SBOE datbase.
Chris Telesca
Wake County Verified Voting
http://noirvnc.blogspot.com
http://statewideirvnc.blogspot.com
Play a what-if game with me
What if someone wanted to manage an illegal voting scheme for some contest at some level? Say they requested a voter database list from their county BOE. Say they analyzed the data to find the 20+% of registered voters who never or very rarely vote. Say they created a sublist of voters in each precinct in their county. Say they had people available that fit the general demographic of the voter. Say they sent these people to each precinct to vote. One person,say a white female aged 35-50, could conceivably go to each precinct and cast a ballot for a white female, aged 35-50, that never votes. Say they were casting a vote for an at-large county commission race. Say there were 75 precincts in the county. That would be 75 illegal votes, cast by that one person, certainly enough to swing a tight race. Repeat this with just 5 people participating and you now have 375 illegal votes.
How would the county BOE prevent this or catch this while in process? In order to cast a ballot in person, all one has to have is a name and an address, both readily obtainable from BOE databases. How would they catch it even after the election is certified? If you can't detect that there is a problem, how can one claim that there is no problem?
"A point in every direction is the same as no point at all" - Pointless Man
With the Republican
With the Republican electioneering machine up and running on all cylinders, their next stop might very well be to implement this sort of conspiracy scheme.
On the other hand, some simple statistical modeling could uncover this sort of gaming of the system in about three seconds.
But then again, couldn't those illegal voters just rifle through trash cans and recycling bins to get the required paperwork? Or even simpler, just forge the documents as part of an international voter fraud ring?
In comparison to the ability of rich businessmen like Art Pope to elections, this "issue" shouldn't even be discussed.
Do good. Be nice. Have fun.
And a voter ID law is supposed to stop this how?
That same white female in your theory could still do what she did with a number of fake IDs. Fake IDs are made all the time.
Do we think the elections folks in each precinct are going to somehow spot fake IDs? That's just insane.
If you want a biometric scanners with notaries and lawyers at every precinct, let's just go hog wild and spend zillions of dollars on that.
The voter ID proposals I've read from bills written before (check the NCGA website) will do NOTHING to prevent the scenario you outlined.
Show me a voter ID system, and I'll show you a way to beat it.
The question is how much money do you want to waste on preventing a problem that doesn't exist.
This whole discussion is based in fear and nonsense.
You both are correct but....
James, statistical modeling could not discern between a person voting on an irregular basis and a vote being cast illegally in their name. You couldn't use that as a tool without having to contact each and every suspect voter. We both know that will never happen due to manpower and that is really why it is not tackled under the current law, resulting in very few if any illegal voting cases being filed.
User, requiring the schemers to create fake id's and documents raises the bar and makes massive voter fraud even more unlikely. Plus, the schemer's have now broken a hell of a lot more laws with their fake id's and documents. That raises the penalties, also.
You keep saying that the problem doesn't exist but my arguement is that there is no way to determine that under the current setup. It is just too easy to game the system and not get caught. Neither of you have really addressed the scenario that I raised.
"A point in every direction is the same as no point at all" - Pointless Man