Just finished a conference call with voting supporters from all over Ohio. On the call were reps from the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), Jobs with Justice, The Urban League, Interfaith Worker Justice, College Democrats from Ohio University and Ohio State, Ohio AFL-CIO, ARC, an Ohio State professor, three volunteer voter protection lawyers, a rep from the Leadership Council and some others.
This is the second voter ID law conservatives in Ohio have passed. The first, in 2005/6, apparently didn’t get the job done, so they’re back for Round Two. No one knows what the first law was supposed to accomplish, and so consequently no one knows why we need a second, still-more restrictive law. We’ll never know because no one in media ever asks conservatives that question. I’m sure the answer is “ACORN” or “The New Black Panther Party” because when conservatives utter either of those words or phrases, media seem to lose all interest in the nuts and bolts of actual voters and voting. The voting process is (in reality) dry and rule-bound and ordinary, so maybe that’s it. Much more fun to gape at doctored video again and again than talk about the basic foundation of democracy, I’m sure.
This latest Ohio voter ID law met some unexpected (and frankly, fun to watch) resistance from the newly elected GOP Secretary of State. He opposes the law, because he (rightly) concludes it will inevitably wrongly disenfranchise lawful voters.
“I believe that if you have a government-issued check, a utility bill in your name with your address on it, that no one made that up,” Husted said to reporters following his speech during League of Women Voters of Ohio’s annual Statehouse Day. “They didn’t call AEP and establish utilities in their name to commit voter fraud.”
Of course they didn’t. That’s crazy.
Anyway, the bill was held up for a while, and now there is apparently discussion on some hurry-up changes to the most egregious portions. The law isn’t set in stone, so we are unable to plan voter education efforts just yet. Hopefully conservatives in the Ohio legislature will find time between the many, many hours they spend loudly showboating on abortion to finally complete the new restrictive rules they demand so voters and others have time to learn the new restrictive rules they demand.
My take on the conference call was that the college students were the most alarmed. They will be a particular area of concentration for voting rights advocates and others who value the right to vote.
When the final law goes in I’ll let you know what approaches we’re using to help make sure that each and every registered, eligible voter gets a first class ballot that is counted.
Mr Stagger Lee
Does any of these laws violate the Voting Rights Act of 1964?
Also will the NAACP legal defense team(as well as other progressive law groups) will be quick to go after those who try to challenge the right of people to vote
PeakVT
Maybe if you re-posted this in an hour… :)
arguingwithsignposts
Kay,
I’m with peakvt here. Lots of thread-stomping atm. You folks should really learn to schedule posts so they don’t tumble by so quickly.
Zach
I don’t understand why Democrats don’t just one up Republicans on election fraud: “If the GOP really cared about election fraud, they’d sign onto our bill that says every voter in every American election has their finger died red, white, or blue (their choice!) to prevent any fraudulent voting.”
Done. I can’t think of a single way to steal an election at the polls that the GOP bills purport to stop that doesn’t involve multiple voting. I suppose you could somehow illegally register voters or fabricate voters on the registration list and pay illegal immigrants, felons, and non-citizens to vote, but they could still only vote once.
Ecks
Someone should be collecting the stories of really charismatic and/orsympathetic (that part shouldn’t matter, but the media won’t pay any attention without it) people who get denied the chance to vote because of these walls of red tape that are being erected, and start putting these narratives out into the media.
The story has to become that the republicans have become the party of unchaining big companies from any kind of restraint, while entangling regular Americans in layers of impenetrable requirements. Got to have the right kind of ID, got to go to the right place, the people at the wrong places won’t tell you where the right places are, etc.
It’s kind of a hard sell because the people who do have drivers licences just assume by default that all real americans have them, and that you must be some kind of lazy freak not to have one… SO that makes them naturally unsympathetic to those who don’t. How to break down that wall?
arguingwithsignposts
Btw, am i the only one who thinks there should be some sort of national minimum standard for voting rights qualification laws (beyond the voting rights act)? Someone explain why this wouldn’t be a good idea beyond state’s rights bullshit?
JPL
arguingwithsignposts, I would prefer that the current House of Representatives not consider this.
Bill Murray
you mean the laws aren’t aimed at keeping the elderly, poor and students from voting, and the first one did not do a good enough job?
arguingwithsignposts
@JPL: i do agree with you on timing, but on general principle, it seems like a no-brainer.
Ben Vernia
When I worked on voter protection issues for the Obama campaign in Ohio in 2008, one of the big issues was Ohio’s poorly worded voter ID law.
The law endorsed various forms of ID, including documents from state agencies with the would-be voter’s name and address, as well as utility bills.
For college students, this meant that you could use a tuition statement, if you attended a state-run school. If you went to a private college, there was pretty much no way you would typically have the right papers if you were originally from out of state, even if you liked Ohio and wanted to stay there forever.
The workaround that the Democratic SOS endorsed was a “zero-balance utility bill.” The college could send you a letter with your name and address on it, along with a statement that, as a student at the school, it provided you with utility services (water, electricity, internet, etc.) for which your amount due was $0.
The trick was convincing colleges to do this, for a variety of reasons. Some didn’t want their students to be involved in local politics for town/gown reasons, others thought there must be something illicit about a zero-balance utility bill, and others just didn’t want to be bothered.
Nevertheless, after a lot of patient work, we got a great many private schools on board. But the whole thing was a great big kludge to get around the lousy wording of the voter ID bill.
Then there were the fights to convince county boards of elections to accept the letters…
MAC
I remember reading something in a Cleveland Plain Dealer article quoting a Republican senator about why the bill was needed. And I remember it because it was absurd.
He said something along the lines that he believed voter fraud was a very big problem, but he couldn’t prove it because he couldn’t prove a negative. The very fact that there was no proof of voter fraud was his way of justifying a bill to (supposedly) prevent voter fraud.
sturunner
Can we also get this also POS on the 11/11 referendum ballot?
iriedc
Crucial work, Kay. Thanks for doing it.
kay
I followed the first ID bill closely, and the “government document” exception you’re talking about was an attempt by liberals and Democrats to leave an opening for poor people to vote. What conservatives do is shut doors on voting. They close down voter options. Any opening is prized, because we can get valid voters past the hurdles they set up :)
Democrats and liberals had some success just continuing to water down the bill once the GOP declared victory on what was essentially the first draft and wandered off to their next Fox interview. That the “government document” provision they deliberately drafted broad was used by students is telling all by itself, and an indication that the opening was needed for more than just poor people, so thanks for mentioning it.
In any event, the current version of the law closes that door. It’s a game to them. They close a door, and we find a window. It sucks, but that’s the truth.
kay
It is absurd, which is why I’m obsessed with it, I think. Stupid shit that doesn’t make sense shouldn’t win. I’m bitter. I’m not asking for that much. I’m asking media to understand the basic voting process, and use their own common sense when looking at these laws. They don’t have to know the case law or history even read the statute. They just have to think it through, all by themselves, and ask three questions. It would take them twenty minutes to figure it out, and they’re paid to think.
I’m serious about the video. The LULAC women was a very effective speaker, and she has a compelling and heartwarming story about brand-new citizens and voting. Liberals are supposed to be creative in the arts and such. Why don’t we ever use that advantage? I’m not creative, but people are. Where are they?
Clearly, I’m extremely bitter and shrill :)