Voter ID: A solution in search of a problem | Arkansas Blog

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

Voter ID: A solution in search of a problem

Posted By on Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:05 AM

click to enlarge voterid_001.jpg
Ernest Dumas provides this week some Arkansas history on vote suppression in the course of explaining the recent push for Voter ID laws. They are aimed at addressing a fraud problem that doesn't exist and will NOT address thefraud that does occur.

The law does contribute to Arkansas's low standing as among the least democratic of states, with low voter participation and new, higher bars to participation. The good news is that the Arkansas courts should make quick work of the Voter ID law, which is blatantly unconstitutional under the terms of the Arkansas Constitution. Dumas writes:

But the ID laws won’t have any effect on any form of election fraud that we have known in this or any other state. Voting fraud is almost never committed by random individuals going to the polls to cast someone else’s vote for them, which is what the ID law might deter. Fraud is committed not by voters but by those conducting elections—sheriffs and county clerks—with the complicity of precinct judges and clerks, most often through the manipulation of absentee ballots. Even that is not much in evidence anymore but it can happen—and still could with photo IDs.

Florida, where vote suppression decided the 2000 presidential election, and its sister states on the seaboard, particularly North Carolina, have taken more draconian steps to curtail voting by blacks and Hispanics, after they were given the green light by the U. S. Supreme Court in the Voting Rights Act decision. Florida’s governor, Rick Scott, said noncitizens were voting illegally in huge numbers (Cubans tended to vote Republican, which was OK, but mainland Hispanics tend more toward Democrats). Republicans produced a pool of 182,000 names of voting noncitizens. It was winnowed down to 2,600 names, which were sent to election supervisors, who found that all but 198 were eligible to vote. Fewer than 40 had voted illegally, whether for Republicans or Democrats nobody knows. A photo ID wouldn’t have stopped them.
There, as in Arkansas, it was a solution in search of a problem. As if we didn’t have real problems.

The full column follows.

By Ernest Dumas

It isn’t what we don’t know that causes us grief but what we know that simply isn’t true.

That is a drearily recurring theme here, but there is no better illustration of the maxim than the voter-suppression drive in Arkansas and elsewhere in the South. It has spread outside the South to a few Midwestern states where Republicans control the lawmaking branches of government.

In the old days, sometimes known as the good old days, it was the Democratic Party that engaged in voter suppression, but demography and a changed political culture have switched the party roles.

What we know that isn’t so is that dishonest voters—by the tens of thousands here in Arkansas and by the millions nationally—are going to the polls in every election and illegally casting other people’s ballots for them, skewing the results in favor of people like Barack Obama and liberal Democrats.

Both recent experience and the state’s long and sad history of elections show that it simply isn’t so, but it is the basis of the voter-identification law that Arkansas begins enforcing at some expense this winter and of other, far more draconian laws in other states that seek to dampen voting by minorities, the elderly, the disabled and the poor. The people who write, sponsor and vote for the laws may very well know that there is absolutely no basis for them, but it was not hard to convince the average voter that his vote was being diluted by hordes of swarthy men and women casting ballots on behalf of people who couldn’t get to the polls that day and if they had would have voted the opposite way from the swarthy plotters.

Much of the impetus for the Arkansas law came from legislators in Northwest Arkansas, where Republicans fear that Hispanics working in the poultry and service industries might be registering and voting before getting citizenship and that they might vote for Democrats. Republicans hope the photo ID might somehow deter them.

The Arkansas law will soon be challenged in court and almost certainly will be struck down, perhaps before it deprives too many people of their right to vote. The Arkansas Constitution makes it clear that the legislature cannot add requirements for voting beyond a person’s permanent registration, even if two-thirds of each house were to vote to amend some part of the registration law.

People in Arkansas were easy to persuade that the photo-ID law was necessary to protect the sanctity of elections because we have a long history of election fraud dating back to statehood and particularly since Reconstruction, when whites and the Democratic Party wrested power from Republicans and their freshly minted African-American voting allies. The state effectively removed the franchise from blacks through a variety of ruses—intimidation, whites-only primaries, the poll tax and the Australian ballot. It would be well after World War II that blacks began to have a token role in elections and the casting of public policy.

Today, the African-American share of the popular vote is considerably less than its share of the population, about 15 percent. Poor people just do not vote in large numbers. Arkansas has one of the weakest democracies of all the states. Only 50.5 percent of Arkansas adults who were eligible to be voters cast a ballot in 2012, far below the national average and better than only four states, Texas, Oklahoma, West Virginia and Hawaii. The legislature this spring thought it could get the number even lower so it passed the law requiring people to flash an official photo identification before voting. Large numbers of the poor do not have an official photo ID and will have to go to considerable trouble to get them. The presumption is that many will say, why bother?

Only a few Republican leaders admit that the purpose of the new voting laws—in some states they are shortening voting periods to make it harder for working people to cast their votes—is to suppress votes. The generic explanation is that it is to stop fraud.

But the ID laws won’t have any effect on any form of election fraud that we have known in this or any other state. Voting fraud is almost never committed by random individuals going to the polls to cast someone else’s vote for them, which is what the ID law might deter. Fraud is committed not by voters but by those conducting elections—sheriffs and county clerks—with the complicity of precinct judges and clerks, most often through the manipulation of absentee ballots. Even that is not much in evidence anymore but it can happen—and still could with photo IDs.

Florida, where vote suppression decided the 2000 presidential election, and its sister states on the seaboard, particularly North Carolina, have taken more draconian steps to curtail voting by blacks and Hispanics, after they were given the green light by the U. S. Supreme Court in the Voting Rights Act decision. Florida’s governor, Rick Scott, said noncitizens were voting illegally in huge numbers (Cubans tended to vote Republican, which was OK, but mainland Hispanics tend more toward Democrats). Republicans produced a pool of 182,000 names of voting noncitizens. It was winnowed down to 2,600 names, which were sent to election supervisors, who found that all but 198 were eligible to vote. Fewer than 40 had voted illegally, whether for Republicans or Democrats nobody knows. A photo ID wouldn’t have stopped them.
There, as in Arkansas, it was a solution in search of a problem. As if we didn’t have real problems.

Tags: , , , ,


Sign up for the Daily Update email
Favorite

Comments (3)

Showing 1-3 of 3

Add a comment

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-3 of 3

Add a comment

More by Max Brantley

  • Where's the outrage?

    Am I the only person, apart from federal prosecutors, outraged about the criminal enterprise that inveigled itself into a privileged position as an Arkansas taxpayer-financed human services provider to the tune, today, of $43 million a year?
    • Jun 21, 2018
  • Where's the outrage?

    • Jun 21, 2018
  • Rutledge opponent hits her socializing with corporate interests

    Mike Lee, the Democratic candidate for attorney general, has criticized Attorney General Leslie Rutledge over recent reports of her participation at private meetings where corporate interests make big contributions to a political group she heads for access to state legal officers.
    • Jun 21, 2018
  • More »

Readers also liked…

  • Former Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel applauds Trump's EPA choice of climate change denier Scott Pruitt

    Dustin McDaniel gives the thumbs up to a man set to dismantle EPA regulations.
    • Dec 8, 2016
  • Trump's strangulation of Obamacare

    If he can't kill it outright, Donald Trump will do all he can to cripple Obamacare. Vox has detailed reporting on deep cuts in federal spending that support nonprofit agencies that help people sign up for coverage under the Affordable Care Act.
    • Sep 18, 2017
  • Trump immigration protest at LR: Quick and fierce

    It was not even 24 hours ago that Sophia Said, director of the Interfaith Center; City Director Kathy Webb and others decided to organize a protest today of Donald Trump's executive order that has left people from Muslim countries languishing in airports or unable to come to the US at all — people with visas, green cards,a  post-doc graduate student en route to Harvard, Google employees abroad, families. I got the message today before noon; others didn't find out until it was going on. But however folks found out, they turned out in huge numbers, more than thousand men, women and children, on the grounds of the state Capitol to listen to speakers from all faiths and many countries.
    • Jan 29, 2017

Most Viewed

  • Proposed child holding site in Arkansas 5 miles from WWII Japanese-American internment camp

    One big difference between Rohwer and today: The parents kept at Rohwer in World War II weren't separated from their children.
  • Baby gorilla born at zoo

    The Little Rock Zoo has a happy announcement: The birth of a healthy baby gorilla. The baby, whose sex has not been determined, was born to Sekani, who came to the zoo in 2004 from Toronto; her baby is her third. The father of the baby is a silverback, Kivu, and he is being "very attentive" to his first child, the zoo reports. Kivu came to the zoo in 2016 from Santa Barbara.
  • All in the family: Ten relatives of top executives were on payroll at PFH, the nonprofit troubled by corruption scandals

    Preferred Family Healthcare, the Medicaid-enriched nonprofit with a vast network of service providers in Arkansas that gobbles up tens of millions of dollars in state funding annually, has been in the news frequently this year because of its connection to multiple federal corruption cases. According to the most recently available tax filings, in 2015 ten family members of top executive were on the payroll, drawing salaries from PFH — including relatives of all four of the executives who were put on leave in the wake of the scandals. Three of these family members were making more than $100,000.
  • Man fleeing troopers loses them, then crashes, dies

    The Arkansas State Police say that a man who had fled from state troopers during a Lonoke County traffic stop this morning later died in a head-on crash on Interstate 40 west of Forrest City.
  • TGIF video and open line

    Headlines for June 22, 2018: Kelso and Little Rock Air Force Base inspected as child shelters, more responses to U.S. child abuse at border; Baby gorilla born at zoo; Hemp growing rules OK’d.

Most Recent Comments

Slideshows

 

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