It might be tempting to dismiss this as just a hit piece. And it is a hit piece. This is what happens when a British socialist tabloid comments on Texas voting laws. But, wed be wrong to dismiss it. What we have is an opportunity that weve been ignoring for the last two years since the Voter ID law passed. The Guardian tells us the story of a poor black Texas man and wants us to believe that hes been disenfranchised, that hes been turned away from the polls and not allowed to vote. If he was actually turned away, that was the fault of poorly trained polling staff. Maybe Travis County needs to step up its game, but Im betting thats not the case. For those of you who arent intimately familiar with Texas voting procedures, the truth is that, in any event, Eric Kennie should have been offered a provisional ballot. If he left without casting a ballot, that was his choice. If the problem, Mr. Kennie had was as presented, his ID, hed have six days to cure his ballot, and it would be counted. Every Texas polling place is run by a Precinct Judge. That judge is a representative of the party that was the majority party in the prior election in that precinct. Every polling place has an Alternate Judge as well, who is a representative of the other party. One of these two officials should have helped Mr. Kennie with his problem, and one of them had a vested interest in doing so. And his problem, if the details are as described, is easy to fix. But before I tell you how to fix Mr. Kennies ID woes, let me tell you about the missed opportunity that Republicans, especially those in blue and purple counties and precincts, have been passing on for over two years. The Judge that had the vested interest in helping Mr. Kennie, was the Republican judge. Helping those who do not have a qualifying ID, or have a problem with their current ID that would otherwise be qualifying, is that opportunity. Republicans should be organizing in droves, walking Democrat majority and leaning areas, seeking out these people and helping them to get their issues addressed. The first reason is simply to get Republicans into these neighborhoods. We should never have needed an excuse, but if thats what weve been waiting for, here it is, on a silver platter, for the last two years. Just interaction is the best way to show that the rhetoric and the Democrat portrayal of Republicans and conservatives are false. The second reason, actively helping those who need some assistance navigating the bureaucracy, sews goodwill. As ye sew.... The third reason, it would completely defuse the incorrect and misleading arguments against the Voter ID law. Not doing it, in fact, invites opponents to line up all their disenfranchised and swamp us in anecdotal misery. And did I mention that we could have been doing this, potentially turning blue areas purple, and purple areas red, for the last two years? And all it takes is being helpful? And following the law? What possible objection could there be? Lets look at Mr. Kennies case. Ed Pilkington, the author of the Guardian piece, makes a great deal about Mr. Kennie having to make great sacrifices and a major journey on multiple busses to try to help himself, and all for naught. Especially turning on the $23 that Mr. Kennie had to pay to get a copy of his birth certificate. I am not going to make any case that $23 is not a major hurdle. For some people, and clearly for Mr. Kennie, it is. But someone did Mr. Kennie a disservice, and no one, not even Mr. Pilkington, provided correct information that would have alleviated this burden. Since 2013, anyone seeking their birth certificate for the purpose of obtaining a voting ID, has that fee waived. Its free. And no one told Mr. Kennie. Mr. Pilkingtons failure to do so can be understood--its not such a great story otherwise. The story also tells us that Mr. Kennie was turned away because his state issued picture ID that he did have was more than 60 days expired. Indeed, that is a requirement of the ID law. We arent told if the ID was more than 2 years expired and if so that makes fixing the issue a little more difficult. If the ID is within two years past expiration, then that ID is all that is needed to get a new state issued ID. So, if he had voted a provisional ballot, taken the old ID to DPS and got a new one within 6 days, and shown it at the Travis County Elections Board, he is not disenfranchised. If there were someone helping, all they really need to do for him is give him a ride. If the ID is more than two years past expiration, then he needs that birth certificate, which he can get for free. His name on the birth certificate doesnt match. It doesnt matter. He can chose either to change the ID to the birth certifiate and use the recorded name for voting, or to leave it alone, because Texas law only requires that the names on the voter rolls and the names on the ID be substantially similar. And in practice, substantially similar means bearing any similarity at all. The best example is that of former Texas and US First Lady, born Claudia Bird Taylor, and later known as Lady Bird Johnson. Those two names, of one is on the voter rolls and one is on the presented ID, are to be considered substantially similar. So yes, the various stories about being turned away because of an as-yet-unchanged maiden name are also bogus. Some Travis County Republican could have helped Mr. Kennie at the expense of some time and a few gallons of gas. And, just maybe, Mr. Kennie would vote Republican. Maybe not--it doesnt matter. Hell forever know that Republicans are at least friendly and helpful. He cant be used by an opportunist journalist or politician. And its just the right, legal, moral, ethical thing to do.
Posted on: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 17:44:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015