UPDATE: Why voter ID laws are a bad idea, except to vote suppressors | Arkansas Blog

Tuesday, November 20, 2012

UPDATE: Why voter ID laws are a bad idea, except to vote suppressors

Posted By on Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 8:39 AM

VOTE FRAUD: Tom Glaze knew that it wasnt caused by lack of voter ID.
  • VOTE FRAUD: Tom Glaze knew that it wasn't caused by lack of voter ID.
Times columnist Ernest Dumas, who collaborated with the late Tom Glaze on a book about Glaze's battles to clean up Arkansas elections, knows something on the topic of election fraud.

He writes this week why the Republican plan to push Voter ID laws through the legislature is a bad idea - or it's a bad idea unless you aim, as the Republicans do, to suppress votes by people not likely to vote for their candidates. He also suggests their effort, if successful, will meet constitutional challenge.

I'd recommend sharing this with your legislator. If that legislator happens to be a Republican, it will be of little use, except to nag a bit at the handful that have a conscience.

UPDATE: SOLUTION: A Democratic legislator said today that Republicans plan to amend the state's organic law — that is propose a constitutional amendment - to enshrine voter discrimination in the Constitution. They control the committees that put three legislative amendment proposals on the ballot and they have majorities in both houses. So a 2014 vote would be a sure thing. It is possible, still, to violate the U.S. Constitution with this measure, which is within the realm of possibility for a bunch that is intent - not on increasing voting - but discouraging it.

DUMAS COLUMN

By Ernest Dumas

Arkansas has a long, sordid history of crooked elections and also of voter apathy, and it’s impossible to know if one follows the other or if both just go with the geography and the culture.

So the Republican movement to suppress voting in the guise of election reform, which will be coming to the Capitol when the legislature convenes in January, might find an attentive audience—or not. Obviously, most people do not care since they do not bother to vote.

But if people did care very much they would be hostile to the idea.

Arkansas already has about the lowest level of voting of all the states— Texas has the lowest and is striving for an even lower depth—so, unless it is to race Texas to the bottom, why would we want to discourage more people from voting?

I helped the late Justice Tom Glaze, a lifetime scourge of election fraud, write a book last year recounting his battles in the 1960s and 1970s to stop the perennial ballot thievery in a dozen or so counties and his efforts in the attorney general’s office and the Supreme Court to perfect the laws that are supposed to guarantee an honest vote. I did a few appearances around the state to promote his book, Justice Glaze being too ill, and there were questions about whether Glaze’s experiences ought to fortify the Republican campaign to require voters to have an official photo identification— typically a current passport or photo driver’s license—before they can get a ballot.

If Glaze’s suits in Conway and Searcy counties and elsewhere and the election code he wrote, which was partially enacted by the legislature in 1969, did not curb the abuses, a Republican legislator asked me, wouldn’t requiring voters to have a photo ID stop a lot of illegal votes? The bill he described, which failed in 2011, will be introduced in January with a Republican majority in both houses.

In my humble and nonprofessional opinion, the legislature cannot constitutionally impose more requirements for voting beyond those in Amendment 51, which is that people meet the qualifications in the amendment and that they register. A voter’s registration and right to vote can never be taken away unless she or he is convicted, dies, moves or fails persistently to vote. But the legislature can pass any law it wants and let the courts decide if it is legal.

The better answer to the question from a journalist whose legal opinion was worth nothing but who had followed elections at close hand for 50 years was that the photo ID would stop no voting fraud—none. A photo ID might stop someone from casting a vote for another registered voter who happened not to go to the polls that day but there is no history of that happening, at least on any scale that should worry us. There has never been even a serious suspicion that sizable numbers of people were pretending to be someone else—someone who had registered to vote but who would not be at the polls that day.

All the election fraud in the state’s history—the casting of illegal ballots or the failure to count legal ones—was committed by election officials, not individual voters pretending to be someone else. It is committed by people who are in charge of the voting, counting and custody of ballots and, of course, the people who appoint or supervise them. If an election clerk is corruptible, even a photo ID will not prevent one illegal vote.

But throwing up new barriers to voting is not merely an empty gesture. It is baneful to democracy. The sponsors of such legislation sometimes are merely naïve, but the purpose is malevolent. It is to make it harder for certain people to vote. They are minorities, the poor, the disabled and elderly, those who are not apt to have a passport or even a driver’s license. The state may furnish an alternate way to get a photo ID, either free or at a charge, but it nevertheless requires an effort beyond registering.

In this instance, “those people” tend to vote more often for Democrats than Republicans, although elderly voters in Arkansas and the rest of the South have shifted sharply to Republicans the past four years because of
Barack Obama and the propaganda that he was taking away part of their Medicare help.

Courts blocked parts of Republican vote-suppression laws this fall because they violated the Voting Rights Act in a few Southern states and elsewhere because they were aimed at restricting voting of certain groups, a
violation of equal protection. The Republican majority on the U.S. Supreme Court next year is apt to finally invalidate the provision of the Voting Rights Act that requires changes in voting laws to be pre-cleared by the Justice
Department. It will say that states covered by the act—Arkansas is not among them—no longer discriminate.

By abolishing the poll tax and opening its primaries to black voters Arkansas had stopped official suppression shortly before the Voting Rights Act passed. Although unlike other Southern states Arkansas did not erect barriers like literacy tests, some of our work was just as ugly. After Reconstruction, we used beatings, threats and even murder to discourage voting by newly franchised blacks and investigations of fraud and, that failing, the simple expedient of taking the boxes of their ballots and throwing them in the river.

A photo ID card and shorter voting hours would demonstrate progress in the fight to suppress votes. We have found a more civilized way to do it.

Tags: , , , ,


Favorite

Comments (18)

Showing 1-18 of 18

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-18 of 18

Add a comment

More by Max Brantley

  • The saga of Rusty Cranford

    Don't miss David Ramsey's telling of the Rusty Cranford story and the Arkansas public corruption scandal in which he's a central figure. It is far from over, but this also gives you some personal insight to a man in the middle of the action.
    • Aug 16, 2018
  • UA-Fort Smith chancellor leaving for South Dakota, interim named

    Edward Serna will lead UA-FS will search for new chancellor is made.
    • Aug 16, 2018
  • Satan vs. the supremacists

    So it goes. The Satanic Temple unveils its statue for a rally in support of the First Amendment protection against state establishment of religion. Meanwhile, a tiny group of white supremacists appeared in opposition, lending comfort to Bro. Jason Rapert's Biblical slab on the back side of the Capitol.
    • Aug 16, 2018
  • More »

Readers also liked…

  • Women's March planned in Arkansas to mark Trump inauguration

    Speaking of Donald Trump and in answer to a reader's question: There will be a women's march in Arkansas on Jan. 21, the day after inauguration, as well as the national march planned in Washington.
    • Dec 30, 2016
  • French Hill votes against disaster aid to Puerto Rico

    Republican U.S. Rep. French Hill alone among Arkansas's House delegation voted last week against a measure that provided $36.5 billion in disaster aid, a portion  for hurricane-ravaged Puerto Rico as well as money for wildfire response and to support the flood insurance program.
    • Oct 14, 2017
  • Tom Cotton's influence on Trump's new security chief

    U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton is getting credit for pushing President Donald Trump to select Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster as his national security adviser, Politico reports.
    • Feb 21, 2017

Most Viewed

Most Recent Comments

Slideshows

 

© 2018 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation